Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26998225›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2015

Variable effects of nicotine, anabasine, and their interactions on parasitized bumble bees.

Lukas P Thorburn, Lynn S Adler, Rebecca E Irwin, Evan C Palmer-Young

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
10.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Host and gut microbiome modulate the antiparasitic activity of nectar metabolites in a bumblebee pollinator.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Flowering plant composition shapes pathogen infection intensity and reproduction in bumble bee colonies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lukas P ThorburnDepartment of Biology, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Lynn S AdlerDepartment of Biology, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Rebecca E IrwinDepartment of Biology, Dartmouth College Hanover, New Hampshire, USA; Department of Applied Ecology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.
Evan C Palmer-YoungDepartment of Biology, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA.
Dartmouth College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Secondary metabolites in floral nectar have been shown to reduce parasite load in two common bumble bee species. Previous studies on the effects of nectar secondary metabolites on parasitized bees have focused on single compounds in isolation; however, in nature, bees are simultaneously exposed to multiple compounds. We tested for interactions between the effects of two alkaloids found in the nectar of Nicotiana spp. plants, nicotine and anabasine, on parasite load and mortality in bumble bees ( Bombus impatiens) infected with the intestinal parasite Crithidia bombi. Adult worker bees inoculated with C. bombi were fed nicotine and anabasine diet treatments in a factorial design, resulting in four nectar treatment combinations:  2 ppm nicotine, 5 ppm anabasine, 2ppm nicotine and 5 ppm anabasine together, or a control alkaloid-free solution. We conducted the experiment twice: first, with bees incubated under variable environmental conditions ('Variable'; temperatures varied from 10-35°C with ambient lighting); and second, under carefully controlled environmental conditions ('Stable'; 27°C incubator, constant darkness). In 'Variable', each alkaloid alone significantly decreased parasite loads, but this effect was not realized with the alkaloids in combination, suggesting an antagonistic interaction. Nicotine but not anabasine significantly increased mortality, and the two compounds had no interactive effects on mortality. In 'Stable', nicotine significantly increased parasite loads, the opposite of its effect in 'Variable'. While not significant, the relationship between anabasine and parasite loads was also positive. Interactive effects between the two alkaloids on parasite load were non-significant, but the pattern of antagonistic interaction was similar to that in the variable experiment. Neither alkaloid, nor their interaction, significantly affected mortality under controlled conditions. Our results do not indicate synergy between Nicotiana nectar alkaloids; however, they do suggest a complex interaction between secondary metabolites, parasites, and environmental variables, in which secondary metabolites can be either toxic or medicinal depending on context.

Indexed as

alkaloidsBombus impatiensBumble beeCrithidia bombinicotineparasitesplant secondary metabolitestritrophic interactions

Identifiers

PMID26998225
PMCPMC4786900
OpenAlexW1720662740

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.