Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32125581›Full record

ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2020

Contrasting Effects of Grass - Endophyte Chemotypes on a Tri-Trophic Cascade.

Benjamin Fuchs, Eric Kuhnert, Jochen Krauss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  4. Frontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Benjamin FuchsBiodiversity Unit, University of Turku, 20014, Turku, Finland. Benjamin.Fuchs@utu.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3678-3284
Eric KuhnertInstitute for Organic Chemistry, BMWZ, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Schneiderberg 38, 30167, Hannover, Germany.
Jochen KraussDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocentre, University of Würzburg, Am Hubland, 97074, Würzburg, Germany.

Funding

Academy of Finland 324523
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systemic grass-endophytes of the genus Epichloë symbiotically infect the above-ground plant parts of many grass species, where they produce alkaloids in a grass- and endophyte-specific manner that are toxic or deterrent to herbivores. An increasing number of studies show cascading negative effects of endophyte-derived alkaloids that extend to higher trophic levels, harming beneficial insects, including those that control aphid populations. Lacewings are one of the major biological aphid controls, and are especially resistant to insecticides and pollutants, but their susceptibility to endophyte infection in the food chain has never been studied. Our study found variability in aphid population growth depending on the endophyte-grass chemotype, where aphid population growth was lowest on chemotypes known for producing high amounts of loline alkaloids. We also showed that larval and pupal development and mortality of the Common Green Lacewing (Chrysoperla carnea) was, in a non-choice experiment, not affected by endophyte infection in the food chain. This is a first indication that lacewings might be resistant to endophyte-derived alkaloids and could be robust biocontrol agents when applied together with endophyte-infected grass, possibly replacing chemical pesticides.

Indexed as

SymbiosisAnimalsAphidsDietEndophytesEpichloeFood ChainHerbivoryInsectaLarvaLoliumLongevityPopulation GrowthBiocontrolEndophytesPest-controlPhytobiomePlant-associated microorganismsPlant defenseTrophic interactions

Identifiers

PMID32125581
PMCPMC7205845

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.