Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30388726›Full record

ArticleInsects2018

Aspects, Including Pitfalls, of Temporal Sampling of Flying Insects, with Special Reference to Aphids.

Hugh D Loxdale

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insects, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Hugh D LoxdaleSchool of Biosciences, Cardiff University, The Sir Martin Evans Building, Museum Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3AX, Wales, UK. LoxdaleH@cardiff.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the advent and widespread use of high-resolution molecular markers in the late 1970s, it is now well established that natural populations of insects are not necessarily homogeneous genetically and show variations at different spatial scales due to a variety of reasons, including hybridization/introgression events. In a similar vein, populations of insects are not necessarily homogenous in time, either over the course of seasons or even within a single season. This of course has profound consequences for surveys examining, for whatever reason/s, the temporal population patterns of insects, especially flying insects as mostly discussed here. In the present article, the topics covered include climate and climate change; changes in ecological niches due to changes in available hosts, i.e., essentially, adaptation events; hybridization influencing behaviour⁻host shifts; infection by pathogens and parasites/parasitoids; habituation to light, sound and pheromone lures; chromosomal/genetic changes affecting physiology and behaviour; and insecticide resistance. If such phenomena-i.e., aspects and pitfalls-are not considered during spatio-temporal study programmes, which is even more true in the light of the recent discovery of morphologically similar/identical cryptic species, then the conclusions drawn in terms of the efforts to combat pest insects or conserve rare and endangered species may be in error and hence end in failure.

Indexed as

adaptationbehaviourchromosomal–genetic changesclimate and climate changeecological nichehabituationhybridizationinsecticide resistancepathogens–predators–parasitoids

Identifiers

PMID30388726
PMCPMC6316496

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.