ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2017
Oviposition Preference for Young Plants by the Large Cabbage Butterfly (Pieris brassicae ) Does not Strongly Correlate with Caterpillar Performance.
Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Different Effects of Induced Plant Defense on Population Densities of Specialist and Generalist Insects: An Explanation by Mathematical Modeling.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Muffled olfactory and sensory cues from the reproductive stage soybean selectively reduce oviposition of a major polyphagous herbivore, fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda).Pest management science · 2025Article
- Defense Responses of Different Rice Varieties Affect Growth Performance and Food Utilization of Cnaphalocrocis medinalis Larvae.Rice (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Assessment of the Molecular Responses of an Ancient Angiosperm against Atypical Insect Oviposition: The Case of Hass Avocados and the Tephritid FlyInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Divergence in Glucosinolate Profiles between High- and Low-Elevation Populations ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effects of temporal variation in the quality of short-lived annual plants on oviposition preference and larval performance of insect herbivores has thus far received little attention. This study examines the effects of plant age on female oviposition preference and offspring performance in the large cabbage white butterfly Pieris brassicae. Adult female butterflies lay variable clusters of eggs on the underside of short-lived annual species in the family Brassicaceae, including the short-lived annuals Brassica nigra and Sinapis arvensis, which are important food plants for P. brassicae in The Netherlands. Here, we compared oviposition preference and larval performance of P. brassicae on three age classes (young, mature, and pre-senescing) of B. nigra and S. arvensis plants. Oviposition preference of P. brassicae declined with plant age in both plant species. Whereas larvae performed similarly on all three age classes in B. nigra, preference and performance were weakly correlated in S. arvensis. Analysis of primary (sugars and amino acids) and secondary (glucosinolates) chemistry in the plant shoots revealed that differences in their quality and quantity were more pronounced with respect to tissue type (leaves vs. flowers) than among different developmental stages of both plant species. Butterflies of P. brassicae may prefer younger and smaller plants for oviposition anticipating that future plant growth and size is optimally synchronized with the final larval instar, which contributes >80% of larval growth before pupation.
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.