ArticleInsects2020
Comparison of Survival and Development of Gypsy Moth
Article in Insects, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Silencing of juvenile hormone-related genes through RNA interference leads to molt failure and high mortality in the spongy moth.Insect science · 2026Article
- Adaptive capacity of Asian populations of Lymantria dispar to non preferred plants during northward expansion.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Range Dynamics of Spongy Moth (Insects · 2025Article
- Fungal Pathogen Infection byBiology · 2025Article
- Virulence and genome analysis of baculovirus isolates from different Lymantria dispar populations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Genetics of flight in spongy moths (Lymantria dispar ssp.): functionally integrated profiling of a complex invasive trait.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Host-specific growth responses of Larix kaempferi and Quercus acutissima to Asian gypsy moth defoliation in central Korea.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Temperature- and Diet-Induced Plasticity of Growth and Digestive Enzymes Activity in Spongy Moth Larvae.Biomolecules · 2023Article
- Phenological Features of the Spongy Moth,Insects · 2023Article
- Analyses of adult transcriptomes from four different populations of the spongy moth, Lymantria dispar L., from China and the USA.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Review
- Effects of Rearing Density on Developmental Traits of Two Different Biotypes of the Gypsy Moth,Insects · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Host utilization information is critical to managers for estimating the hosts at risk and potential geographic range for gypsy moths from different geographic origins. In this study, the development and survival of gypsy moths from all three subspecies on 13 North American conifers and three broadleaf hosts were compared. There was variation in the ability of gypsy moth larvae from different geographic origins to utilize (survive and develop on) key North American conifers. However, that variation was not consistent within gypsy moth subspecies, but instead was more consistent with populations from different origins being preadapted to utilize different hosts and having different biologic traits. Some Asian populations developed and survived well on some conifers while populations from Europe and North America gained weight faster and/or survived better than some Asian populations. Although development was slower and survival poorer on several of the conifers, first instar larvae were able to utilize conifers unless the needles were tough or feeding deterrents were present. Host phenology was also critical since the early instars fed preferentially on new foliage or buds. Gypsy moth larvae can utilize many hosts, so this makes it a very adaptable invasive species that warrants taking measures to prevent its spread.
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.