ArticleExperimental & applied acarology2014
Host finding behaviour of the coconut mite Aceria guerreronis.
Article in Experimental & applied acarology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temperature-dependent life history traits of the fig mite, Aceria ficus (Cotte) (Acari: Eriophyidae).Experimental & applied acarology · 2025Article
- Population dynamics of Steneotarsonemus concavuscutum, a neglected mite pest in coconut fruits (Cocos nucifera).Experimental & applied acarology · 2023Article
- Article
- Evidence of Amblyseius largoensis and Euseius alatus as biological control agent of Aceria guerreronis.Experimental & applied acarology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For the coconut mite, Aceria guerreronis Keifer, its host plant, the coconut palm, is not merely a source of food, but more generally a habitat to live in for several generations. For these minute organisms, finding a new plant is difficult and risky, especially because their main mode of dispersal is passive drifting with the wind and because they are highly specialized on their host plant. Consequently, the probability of landing on a suitable host is very low, let alone to land in their specific microhabitat within the host. How coconut mites manage to find their microhabitat within a host plant is still underexplored. We tested the hypothesis that they use volatile chemical information emanating from the plant to find a specific site within their host plants and/or use non-volatile plant chemicals to stay at a profitable site on the plant. This was investigated in a Y-tube olfactometer (i.e. under conditions of a directed wind flow) and on cross-shaped arenas (i.e. under conditions of turbulent air) that either allowed contact with odour sources or not. The mites had to choose between odours from specific parts (leaflet, spikelet or fruit) of a non-infested coconut plant and clean air as the alternative. In the olfactometer experiments, no mites were found to reach the upwind end of the Y-tube: <5 % of the mites were able to pass the bifurcation of the "Y". On the cross-shaped arenas, however, a large number of coconut mites was found only when the arm of the arena contained discs of fruit epidermis and contact with these discs was allowed. The results suggest that coconut mites on palm trees are not attracted to specific sites on the plant by volatile plant chemicals, but that they arrested once they contact the substrate of specific sites. Possibly, they perceive non-volatile chemicals, but these remain to be identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.