Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31190248›Full record

ReviewExperimental & applied acarology2019

Molecular markers and their application in the monitoring of acaricide resistance in Rhipicephalus microplus.

Rinesh Kumar

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental & applied acarology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Effects ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Acaricide Resistance Development inPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Acaricides Resistance in Ticks: Selection, Diagnosis, Mechanisms, and Mitigation.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Protecting dogs and cats against the Australian paralysis tick,Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2021
    Review
  20. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rinesh KumarCollege of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Rewa, Madhya Pradesh, India. rineshsinha@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5636-6755
Department of Animal Husbandry · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring acaricide resistance and understanding the underlying mechanisms are critically important in developing strategies for resistance management and tick control. Identification of single nucleotide polymorphisms in the acaricide-resistant associated gene of Rhipicephalus microplus has enabled the development of molecular markers for detection and monitoring of resistance against different types of acaricide. There are many molecular markers developed for resistance monitoring, including mutations on target genes such as sodium channel, acetylcholinesterase, carboxylesterase, β-adrenergic octopamine receptor, octopamine-tyramine etc. Molecular genotyping through molecular markers can detect the presence of resistance-associated genes in a tick population before it reaches high frequency. This review aims to provide an update on the various molecular markers discovered to date from different regions of the world.

Indexed as

AcaricidesAnimalsArthropod ProteinsDrug ResistanceMutationPolymorphism, Single NucleotideRhipicephalusTick ControlAcaricidesArthropod ProteinsAcaricide resistanceMolecular diagnosisMolecular markersRhipicephalus microplus

Identifiers

PMID31190248
OpenAlexW2951546673

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.