Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30301240›Full record

ReviewPlants (Basel, Switzerland)2018

Should I Eat or Should I Go? Acridid Grasshoppers and Their Novel Host Plants: Potential for Biotic Resistance.

Alina Avanesyan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Response of FivePlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Alina AvanesyanDepartment of Entomology, University of Maryland, 4291 Fieldhouse Drive, 3128 Plant Sciences, College Park, MD 20742, USA. alina@umd.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4178-656X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel, non-coevolved associations between introduced plants and native insect herbivores may lead to changes in trophic interactions in native communities, as well as to substantial economic problems. Although some studies in invasion ecology demonstrated that native herbivores can preferentially feed on introduced plants and therefore contribute to the biotic resistance of native communities to plant invasions, the role of acridid grasshoppers as native generalist insect herbivores is largely overlooked. This systematic review aimed to identify patterns of grasshopper feeding preferences for native versus introduced plants and, consequently, a potential of grasshoppers to provide biotic resistance of native communities. The analysis of 63 records of feeding preference trials for 28 North-American grasshopper species (retrieved from 2146 studies published during 1967⁻2017) has demonstrated a preference of grasshoppers for introduced host plants, and identified 12 preferred introduced plants with high or middle invasive ranks. A significant effect of the life stage (

Indexed as

Acrididaeherbivoryintroduced plantsinvasive speciesnovel associationsplant-insect interactions

Identifiers

PMID30301240
PMCPMC6313845

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.