Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25008387›Full record

ArticleDie Naturwissenschaften2014

Development of a generalist predator, Podisus maculiventris, on glucosinolate sequestering and nonsequestering prey.

Moniek van Geem, Jeffrey A Harvey, Rieta Gols

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Die Naturwissenschaften, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Moniek van GeemDepartment of Terrestrial Ecology, Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Droevendaalsesteeg 10, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands, m.vangeem@nioo.knaw.nl.
Jeffrey A Harvey
Rieta Gols

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insect herbivores exhibit various strategies to counter the toxic effects of plant chemical defenses. These strategies include the detoxification, excretion, and sequestration of plant secondary metabolites. The latter strategy is often considered to provide an additional benefit in that it provides herbivores with protection against natural enemies such as predators. Profiles of sequestered chemicals are influenced by the food plants from which these chemicals are derived. We compared the effects of sequestration and nonsequestration of plant secondary metabolites in two specialist herbivores on the development of a generalist predator, Podisus maculiventris. Profiles of glucosinolates, secondary metabolites characteristic for the Brassicaceae, are known to differ considerably both inter- and intraspecifically. Throughout their immature (=nymphal) development, the predator was fed on larval stages of either sequestering (turnip sawfly, Athalia rosae) or nonsequestering (small cabbage white butterfly, Pieris rapae) prey that in turn had been feeding on plants originating from three wild cabbage (Brassica oleracea) populations that have previously been shown to differ in their glucosinolate profiles. We compared survival, development time, and adult body mass as parameters for bug performance. Our results show that sequestration of glucosinolates by A. rosae only marginally affected the development of P. maculiventris. The effects of plant population on predator performance were variable. We suggest that sequestration of glucosinolates by A. rosae functions not only as a defensive mechanism against some predators, but may also be an alternative way of harmlessly dealing with plant allelochemicals.

Indexed as

Food ChainAnimalsBody SizeBrassicaGlucosinolatesHeteropteraHymenopteraLepidopteraSurvival AnalysisTime FactorsGlucosinolates

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.