Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27959958›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Phylogeography of the Wheat Stem Sawfly, Cephus cinctus Norton (Hymenoptera: Cephidae): Implications for Pest Management.

Vincent Lesieur, Jean-François Martin, David K Weaver, Kim A Hoelmer, David R Smith, Wendell L Morrill, Nassera Kadiri, Frank B Peairs, Darren M Cockrell, Terri L Randolph and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Copy number variation ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  6. 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

12 authors.

Vincent LesieurUSDA ARS, European Biological Control Laboratory, 810, Avenue du Campus Agropolis, Montferrier sur Lez, France.
Jean-François MartinMontpellier-SupAgro, UMR CBGP, 755 avenue du Campus Agropolis, Montferrier sur Lez, France.
David K WeaverDepartment of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States of America.
Kim A HoelmerUSDA ARS, Beneficial Insects Introduction Research Unit, Newark, DE, United States of America.
David R SmithSystematic Entomology Laboratory, USDA ARS, c/o National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., United States of America.
Wendell L MorrillDepartment of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, United States of America.
Nassera KadiriDépartement Biologie-Ecologie-Environnement, Laboratoire de Zoogéographie, UMR 5175 CEFE, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier 3, Route de Mende, Montpellier cedex 5, France.
Frank B PeairsDepartment of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, United States of America.
Darren M CockrellDepartment of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, United States of America.
Terri L RandolphDepartment of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, United States of America.
Debra K WatersNorthern Plains Agricultural Research Laboratory, USDA ARS, Sidney, MT, United States of America.
Marie-Claude BonUSDA ARS, European Biological Control Laboratory, 810, Avenue du Campus Agropolis, Montferrier sur Lez, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The wheat stem sawfly, Cephus cinctus Norton (Hymenoptera: Cephidae), is a key pest of wheat in the northern Great Plains of North America, and damage resulting from this species has recently expanded southward. Current pest management practices are inadequate and uncertainty regarding geographic origin, as well as limited data on population structure and dynamics across North America impede progress towards more informed management. We examined the genetic divergence between samples collected in North America and northeastern Asia, the assumed native range of C. cinctus using two mitochondrial regions (COI and 16S). Subsequently, we characterized the structure of genetic diversity in the main wheat producing areas in North America using a combination of mtDNA marker and microsatellites in samples collected both in wheat fields and in grasses in wildlands. The strong genetic divergence observed between North American samples and Asian congeners, in particular the synonimized C. hyalinatus, did not support the hypothesis of a recent American colonization by C. cinctus. Furthermore, the relatively high genetic diversity both with mtDNA and microsatellite markers offered additional evidence in favor of the native American origin of this pest. The genetic diversity of North American populations is structured into three genetic clusters and these are highly correlated with geography. Regarding the recent southern outbreaks in North America, the results tend to exclude the hypothesis of recent movement of damaging wheat stem sawfly populations from the northern area. The shift in host plant use by local populations appears to be the most likely scenario. Finally, the significance of these findings is discussed in the context of pest management.

Indexed as

AllelesAnimalsBayes TheoremCell DifferentiationDNA, MitochondrialElectron Transport Complex IVFemaleGenetic VariationGeographyHymenopteraMaleMicrosatellite RepeatsMultigene FamilyPest ControlPhylogenyPhylogeographyDNA, MitochondrialElectron Transport Complex IVRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID27959958
PMCPMC5154603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.