Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31748574›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Anatomical study of the coffee berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei) using micro-computed tomography.

Ignacio Alba-Alejandre, Javier Alba-Tercedor, Fernando E Vega

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Morphological Observation of the Pupal Body of Trypoxylus dichotomus Using 9.4T MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ignacio Alba-AlejandreDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Campus de Fuentenueva, 18071, Granada, Spain.
Javier Alba-TercedorDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Campus de Fuentenueva, 18071, Granada, Spain. jalba@ugr.es.
Fernando E VegaSustainable Perennial Crops Laboratory, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD, 20705, USA. Fernando.Vega@usda.gov.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditionally, the study of anatomy in insects has been based on dissection techniques. Micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) is an X-ray based technique that allows visualization of the internal anatomy of insects in situ and does not require dissections. We report on the use of micro-CT scans to study, in detail, the internal structures and organs of the coffee berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei), the most damaging insect pest of coffee worldwide. Detailed images and videos allowed us to make the first description of the aedeagus and the first report of differences between the sexes based on internal anatomy (flight musculature, midgut shape, hindgut convolutions, brain shape and size) and external morphology (lateral outline of the pronotum and number of abdominal tergites). This study is the first complete micro-CT reconstruction of the anatomy of an insect and is also the smallest insect to have been evaluated in this way. High quality rendered images, and additional supplementary videos and 3D models are suitable for use with mobile devices and are useful tools for future research and as teaching aids.

Identifiers

PMID31748574
PMCPMC6868283

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.