Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27059329›Full record

ReviewJournal of chemical ecology2016

Developing Soil Microbial Inoculants for Pest Management: Can One Have Too Much of a Good Thing?

Kiran R Gadhave, James E Hourston, Alan C Gange

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of chemical ecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Towards sustainable agriculture: rhizosphere microbiome engineering.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2021
    Review
  5. The role of soils in provision of genetic, medicinal and biochemical resources.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  6. Effect ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kiran R GadhaveSchool of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK. krg@uga.edu.
James E HourstonSchool of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK.
Alan C GangeSchool of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK.
Royal Holloway University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Soil microbes present a novel and cost-effective method of increasing plant resistance to insect pests and thus create a sustainable opportunity to reduce current pesticide application. However, the use of microbes in integrated pest management programs is still in its infancy. This can be attributed primarily to the variations in microbial inoculum performance under laboratory and field conditions. Soil inoculants containing single, indigenous microbial species have shown promising results in increasing chemical defenses of plants against foliar feeding insects. Conversely, commercial inoculants containing multiple species tend to show no effects on herbivore infestation in the field. We present here a simple model that endeavours to explain how single and multiple species in microbial inoculants differentially govern insect population dynamics via changes in plant chemical profiles. We discuss further how this knowledge can be applied to manipulate soil microbial species and develop 'tailored' microbial inoculants that could be used in plant protection against antagonists.

Indexed as

Soil MicrobiologyAgricultureAnimalsFood ChainPest Control, BiologicalPlantsFoliar chemistryInsect herbivoresMicrobial inoculantsPest managementTritrophic interactions

Identifiers

PMID27059329
OpenAlexW2329859094

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.