Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31413717›Full record

ArticleCurrent zoology2019

Role of conspecifics and personal experience on behavioral avoidance of contaminated flowers by bumblebees.

Bertrand Fouks, Emily G Robb, H Michael G Lattorff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current zoology, 2019. 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. 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

3 authors.

Bertrand FouksInstitut für Biologie, Molekulare Ökologie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Hoher Weg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Emily G RobbInstitut für Biologie, Molekulare Ökologie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Hoher Weg, Halle (Saale), Germany.
H Michael G LattorffInstitut für Biologie, Molekulare Ökologie, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg Hoher Weg, Halle (Saale), Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pollinators use multiple cues whilst foraging including direct cues from flowers and indirect cues from other pollinators. The use of indirect social cues is common in social insects, such as honeybees and bumblebees, where a social environment facilitates the ability to use such cues. Bumblebees use cues to forage on flowers according to previous foraging experiences. Flowers are an essential food source for pollinators but also pose a high risk of parasite infection through the shared use of flowers leading to parasite spillover. Nevertheless, bumblebees have evolved behavioral defense mechanisms to limit parasite infection by avoiding contaminated flowers. Mechanisms underlying the avoidance of contaminated flowers by bumblebees are poorly understood. Bumblebees were recorded having the choice to forage on non-contaminated flowers and flowers contaminated by a trypan osome gut parasite,

Indexed as

behavioral immunitycopying behaviorHost-parasite interactionsinadvertent social informationpollinatorssocial learning

Identifiers

PMID31413717
PMCPMC6688574

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.