ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2019
Impact of insect growth regulators on biology and behavior of Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae).
Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Generating Monoclonal Antibodies against Buprofezin and Developing Immunoassays for Its Residue Detection in Tea Samples.Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of four insect growth regulators (IGRs) on biology and behavior of Chrysoperla carnea. IGRs were sprayed on eggs, larvae (~24-h old), and pupae at recommended doses along with their relatively low and high dose. Eggs, larval, and pupal survival were assessed along with effects on fecundity and fertility of C. carnea adults emerged when pupae were treated. IOBC (International Organization for Biological and Integrated Control) proposed toxicity scale was used to categorize the IGRs. Concerning the eggs lufenuron, pyriproxyfen, and diflubenzuron were categorized as slightly harmful (class 2), whereas buprofezin was categorized as moderately harmful (class 3). Lufenuron and diflubenzuron were classified as slightly harmful (class 2) to C. carnea larvae, while pyriproxyfen and buprofezin were categorized as harmless (class 1). Buprofezin did not affect the locomotion behavior of the larvae as time proportion spent in the treated and untreated zone was equal, while all others were affected significantly. Regarding the pupae, pyriproxyfen and buprofezin were found slightly harmful (class 2) and moderately harmful (class 3), respectively, and considerably reduced fecundity and fertility of the C. carnea adults. Lufenuron and diflubenzuron did not affect significantly when pupae were treated. Based on combined effect, the IGRs lufenuron and diflubenzuron did nott influence the significantly on population parameters comparatively. This could be helpful for the use of IGRs in integration with C. carnea towards their conservation in agroecosystem.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.