ReviewFrontiers in plant science2016
Belowground Ecology of Scarabs Feeding on Grass Roots: Current Knowledge and Future Directions for Management in Australasia.
Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Mitogenomics of FourGenes · 2026Article
- Physiological, molecular and histological response of Pentodon bispinosus larvae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) as a novel bioindicator for soil pollutants.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Consumer or Decomposer? Behavioral and Morphological Diagnosis of White Grubs.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Metagenomic analysis reveals methanogenic and other archaeal genes in the digestive tract of invasive Japanese beetle larvae and associated soil.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Transcriptomics Reveal Several Novel Viruses from Canegrubs (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in Central Queensland, Australia.Viruses · 2022Article
- Altered precipitation and root herbivory affect the productivity and composition of a mesic grassland.BMC ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- First field estimation of greenhouse gas release from European soil-dwelling Scarabaeidae larvae targeting the genus Melolontha.PloS one · 2020Article
- Active sound production of scarab beetle larvae opens up new possibilities for species-specific pest monitoring in soils.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Article
- Ecological and pest-management implications of sex differences in scarab landing patterns on grape vines.PeerJ · 2017Article
- Novel In vitro Procedures for Rearing a Root-Feeding Pest (Heteronychus arator) of Grasslands.Frontiers in plant science · 2016Article
- Get Tough, Get Toxic, or Get a Bodyguard: Identifying Candidate Traits Conferring Belowground Resistance to Herbivores in Grasses.Frontiers in plant science · 2016Review
- DRI-Grass: A New Experimental Platform for Addressing Grassland Ecosystem Responses to Future Precipitation Scenarios in South-East Australia.Frontiers in plant science · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many scarab beetles spend the majority of their lives belowground as larvae, feeding on grass roots. Many of these larvae are significant pests, causing damage to crops and grasslands. Damage by larvae of the greyback cane beetle (Dermolepida albohirtum), for example, can cause financial losses of up to AU$40 million annually to the Australian sugarcane industry. We review the ecology of some scarab larvae in Australasia, focusing on three subfamilies; Dynastinae, Rutelinae, and Melolonthinae, containing key pest species. Although considerable research on the control of some scarab pests has been carried out in Australasia, for some species, the basic biology and ecology remains largely unexplored. We synthesize what is known about these scarab larvae and outline key knowledge gaps to highlight future research directions with a view to improve pest management. We do this by presenting an overview of the scarab larval host plants and feeding behavior; the impacts of abiotic (temperature, moisture, and fertilization) and biotic (pathogens, natural enemies, and microbial symbionts) factors on scarab larvae and conclude with how abiotic and biotic factors can be applied in agriculture for improved pest management, suggesting future research directions. Several host plant microbial symbionts, such as arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and endophytes, can improve plant tolerance to scarabs and reduce larval performance, which have shown promise for use in pest management. In addition to this, several microbial scarab pathogens have been isolated for commercial use in pest management with particularly promising results. The entomopathogenic fungus Metarhizium anisopliae caused a 50% reduction in cane beetle larvae while natural enemies such as entomopathogenic nematodes have also shown potential as a biocontrol. Key abiotic factors, such as soil water, play an important role in affecting both scarab larvae and these control agents and should therefore feature in future multi-factorial experiments. Continued research should focus on filling knowledge gaps including host plant preferences, attractive trap crops, and naturally occurring pathogens that are locally adapted, to achieve high efficacy in the field.
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.