Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29769137›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2018

Laboratory studies on the oviposition stimuli of Culicoides stellifer (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae), a suspected vector of Orbiviruses in the United States.

Dinesh Erram, Nathan Burkett-Cadena

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Viruses · 2024
    Article
  4. Outlook on RNAi-Based Strategies for ControllingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Modeling Abundance ofViruses · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Resource Selection by Wild and Ranched White-Tailed Deer (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dinesh ErramFlorida Medical Entomology Laboratory, University of Florida, IFAS, 200 9th St. SE, Vero Beach, FL, 32962, USA. derram@ufl.edu.
Nathan Burkett-CadenaFlorida Medical Entomology Laboratory, University of Florida, IFAS, 200 9th St. SE, Vero Beach, FL, 32962, USA.
Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiting midges of the genus Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) exert a significant impact on animal agriculture worldwide because they transmit bluetongue virus (BTV) and epizootic hemorrhagic disease virus (EHDV) to ruminants. Without effective vaccines, BTV/EHDV vector management strategies are needed, particularly in commercial white-tailed deer (WTD) facilities. However, detailed information on the ecology of midge immatures in/around cervid operations is currently lacking. Towards filling this knowledge gap, we conducted two-choice oviposition experiments with field-collected Culicoides stellifer Coquillett (a suspected vector of BTV/EHDV in the USA) under laboratory conditions to examine which natural source from the larval habitat is relatively more attractive for midge oviposition.

methodsField-collected C. stellifer females (CDC-UV light traps) were given a blood meal from live chicken and examined for their oviposition preferences for individual (or mixed) potential larval habitat oviposition stimuli in two-choice bioassays. Substrates included mud from C. stellifer habitat, mud from allopatric site, vegetation (Sphagnum spp. mosses), field water, WTD manure and de-ionized water (control).

resultsThe majority of midges (91%) oviposited in only one dish, with few females (9%) ovipositing in both the dishes. Gravid females demonstrated an overall oviposition preference for substrates with mud and vegetation from the larval habitat, depositing a significantly higher proportion of eggs on mud (52.3%) and vegetation (81.8%) than on controls (≤ 18.2%) (P ≤ 0.0320). Moreover, greater number of eggs per female were deposited on mud (29.5-40.7 depending on trial) and vegetation (38.2) than on controls (≤ 5.8). WTD manure, field water and mud from allopatric site were not found to be more attractive than controls for oviposition. Combining individual substrates (mud + WTD manure; mud + moss + WTD manure + field water) did not elicit greater oviposition responses than mud or moss alone.

conclusionsManagement strategies to discourage C. stellifer oviposition in/around commercial cervid facilities should likely focus on mud and/or vegetation, rather than WTD manure. However, further studies are needed to examine whether the spatial distributions of C. stellifer and Sphagnum spp. moss are correlated, and to determine whether targeting vegetation in/around cervid facilities can contribute to reductions in local midge densities.

Indexed as

EcosystemAnimalsBiological AssayBluetongueBluetongue virusCeratopogonidaeHemorrhagic Disease Virus, EpizooticInsect VectorsLarvaOrbivirusOvipositionReoviridae InfectionsRuminantsUnited StatesBiting midgesCulicoides stelliferHemorrhagic diseaseOvipositionRuminants

Identifiers

PMID29769137
PMCPMC5956791
OpenAlexW2807104366

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.