Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20872243›Full record

ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2010

Use of an innovative T-tube maze assay and the proboscis extension response assay to assess sublethal effects of GM products and pesticides on learning capacity of the honey bee Apis mellifera L.

Peng Han, Chang-Ying Niu, Chao-Liang Lei, Jin-Jie Cui, Nicolas Desneux

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 124 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Peng HanCollege of Plant Science & Technology, Hubei Key Laboratory of Utilization of Insect Resources and Sustainable Control of Pests, Huazhong Agricultural University, Shizi Mountain Road, Wuhan 430070, China.
Chang-Ying Niu
Chao-Liang Lei
Jin-Jie Cui
Nicolas Desneux
Huazhong Agricultural University · CNChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences · CNInstitut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transgenic Cry1Ac+CpTI cotton (CCRI41) is a promising cotton cultivar throughout China but side effects and especially sublethal effects of this transgenic cultivar on beneficial insects remain poorly studied. More specifically potential sublethal effects on behavioural traits of the honey bee Apis mellifera L. have not been formally assessed despite the importance of honey bees for pollination. The goal of our study was to assess potential effects of CCRI41 cotton pollen on visual and olfactory learning by honey bees. After a 7-day oral chronic exposure to honey mixed with either CCRI41 pollen, imidacloprid-treated conventional pollen (used as positive sublethal control) or conventional pollen (control), learning performance was evaluated by the classical proboscis extension reflex (PER) procedure as well as a T-tube maze test. The latter assay was designed as a new device to assess potential side effects of pesticides on visual associative learning of honey bees. These two procedures were complementary because the former focused on olfactory learning while the latter was involved in visual learning based on visual orientation ability. Oral exposure to CCRI41 pollen did not affect learning capacities of honey bees in both the T-tube maze and PER tests. However, exposure to imidacloprid resulted in reduced visual learning capacities in T-tube maze evaluation and decreased olfactory learning performances measured with PER. The implications of these results are discussed in terms of risks of transgenic CCRI41 cotton crops for honey bees.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacillus thuringiensis ToxinsBacterial ProteinsBeesChinaConditioning, ClassicalEndotoxinsGossypiumHemolysin ProteinsImidazolesInsecticidesLearningMaze LearningNeonicotinoidsNitro CompoundsPlants, Genetically ModifiedBacillus thuringiensis ToxinsBacterial ProteinsEndotoxinsHemolysin ProteinsimidaclopridImidazolesinsecticidal crystal protein, Bacillus ThuringiensisInsecticidesNeonicotinoidsNitro Compounds

Identifiers

PMID20872243
PMCPMC2987206
OpenAlexW2041656430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.