Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31362607›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2019

Modality-specific impairment of learning by a neonicotinoid pesticide.

Felicity Muth, Jacob S Francis, Anne S Leonard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Do novel insecticides pose a threat to beneficial insects?Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  17. Individual and combined impacts of sulfoxaflor andProceedings. Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

3 authors.

Felicity MuthDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, 2415 Speedway, Austin, TX 78712, USA.
Jacob S FrancisDepartment of Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557, USA.
Anne S LeonardDepartment of Biology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neonicotinoid pesticides can impair bees' ability to learn and remember information about flowers, critical for effective foraging. Although these effects on cognition may contribute to broader effects on health and performance, to date they have largely been assayed in simplified protocols that consider learning in a single sensory modality, usually olfaction. Given that real flowers display a variety of potentially useful signals, we assessed the effects of acute neonicotinoid exposure on multimodal learning in free-flying bumblebees. We found that neonicotinoid consumption differentially impacted learning of floral stimuli, impairing scent, but not colour, learning. These findings raise questions about the mechanisms by which pesticides might differentially impair sensory systems, with implications for how neonicotinoids affect multiple aspects of bee ecology.

Indexed as

InsecticidesPesticidesAnimalsBeesFlowersLearningNeonicotinoidsNitro CompoundsInsecticidesNeonicotinoidsNitro CompoundsPesticidesBombus impatiensbumblebeecognitionimidacloprid

Identifiers

PMID31362607
PMCPMC6684981

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.