Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26463062›Full record

ArticleInsects2014

Efficacies and Second-Year Effects of SPLAT GM™ and SPLAT GM™ Organic Formulations.

Ksenia S Onufrieva, Andrea D Hickman, Donna S Leonard, Patrick C Tobin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insects, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

4 authors.

Ksenia S OnufrievaDepartment of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA. ksenia@vt.edu.
Andrea D HickmanDepartment of Entomology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA. ahickma@vt.edu.
Donna S LeonardForest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Health Protection, Asheville, NC 28802, USA. dleonard@fs.fed.us.
Patrick C TobinSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. pctobin@uw.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mating disruption is the primary control tactic used against the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) under the gypsy moth Slow the Spread (STS) program. In this paper, we present the results of the multiyear study designed to evaluate a new liquid SPLAT GM™ (ISCA Tech, Riverside, CA, USA) Organic formulation, which is approved by the USDA to meet National Organic Program Standards for use in organic certified farms, for its ability to disrupt gypsy moth mating, and to evaluate the environmental persistence of SPLAT GM™ and SPLAT GM™ Organic formulations. Environmental persistence of the pheromone beyond the year of application is a significant concern since STS relies on trap catch data to evaluate treatment success. The study was conducted in 2007-2012 in forested areas in Virginia and Wisconsin, USA. We observed that SPLAT GM™ Organic reduced gypsy moth trap catch by ≥90% for 10 weeks in a similar manner as SPLAT GM™ and Hercon Disrupt(®) II (Hercon Environmental, Emigsville, PA, USA). Although we observed persistent effects in all products one year after application, the persistence observed in SPLAT GM™ and SPLAT GM™ Organic was significantly lower than that of Hercon Disrupt(®) II plastic laminated flakes.

Indexed as

disparluregypsy mothpersistencepheromonesecond-year effect

Identifiers

PMID26463062
PMCPMC4553524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.