Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28421324›Full record

ArticleOecologia2017

Weathering the storm: how lodgepole pine trees survive mountain pine beetle outbreaks.

Nadir Erbilgin, Jonathan A Cale, Altaf Hussain, Guncha Ishangulyyeva, Jennifer G Klutsch, Ahmed Najar, Shiyang Zhao

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oecologia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Pathophysiology and transcriptomic analysis ofFrontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nadir ErbilginDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada. erbilgin@ualberta.ca.
Jonathan A CaleDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada.
Altaf HussainDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada.
Guncha IshangulyyevaDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada.
Jennifer G KlutschDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada.
Ahmed NajarDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada.
Shiyang ZhaoDepartment of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, 442 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E3, Canada.
University of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent mountain pine beetle outbreaks in western North America killed millions of lodgepole pine trees, leaving few survivors. However, the mechanism underlying the ability of trees to survive bark beetle outbreaks is unknown, but likely involve phytochemicals such as monoterpenes and fatty acids that can drive beetle aggregation and colonization on their hosts. Thus, we conducted a field survey of beetle-resistant lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) trees to retrospectively deduce whether these phytochemicals underlie their survival by comparing their chemistry to that of non-attacked trees in the same stands. We also compared beetle attack characteristics between resistant and beetle-killed trees. Beetle-killed trees had more beetle attacks and longer ovipositional galleries than resistant trees, which also lacked the larval establishment found in beetle-killed trees. Resistant trees contained high amounts of toxic and attraction-inhibitive compounds and low amounts of pheromone-precursor and synergist compounds. During beetle host aggregation and colonization, these compounds likely served three critical roles in tree survival. First, low amounts of pheromone-precursor (α-pinene) and synergist (mycrene, terpinolene) compounds reduced or prevented beetles from attracting conspecifics to residual trees. Second, high amounts of 4-allyanisole further inhibited beetle attraction to its pheromone. Finally, high amounts of toxic limonene, 3-carene, 4-allyanisole, α-linolenic acid, and linoleic acid inhibited beetle gallery establishment and oviposition. We conclude that the variation of chemotypic expression of local plant populations can have profound ecological consequences including survival during insect outbreaks.

Indexed as

ColeopteraDisease OutbreaksPinusAnimalsBicyclic MonoterpenesFemaleMonoterpenesNorth AmericaTreesalpha-pineneBicyclic MonoterpenesMonoterpenesAnti-herbivore defence mechanismConifersDendroctonus ponderosaeOutbreaksTree resistance and susceptibility

Identifiers

PMID28421324
OpenAlexW2605659854

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.