Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33199794›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Exposure to a biopesticide interferes with sucrose responsiveness and learning in honey bees.

Daniele Carlesso, Stefania Smargiassi, Lara Sassoli, Federico Cappa, Rita Cervo, David Baracchi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. A New Strain ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Daniele CarlessoDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Via Madonna del Piano, 6, 50019, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
Stefania SmargiassiDepartment of Life Sciences and Systems Biology, University of Turin, Via Accademia Albertina 13, 10123, Turin, Italy.
Lara SassoliDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Via Madonna del Piano, 6, 50019, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
Federico CappaDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Via Madonna del Piano, 6, 50019, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
Rita CervoDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Via Madonna del Piano, 6, 50019, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy.
David BaracchiDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Via Madonna del Piano, 6, 50019, Sesto Fiorentino, Italy. david.baracchi@unifi.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana is a widely used biopesticide that is considered as an effective alternative to classical agrochemicals. B. bassiana is thought to be safe for pollinators although little is known about its side-effects on pollinators' behaviour and cognition. Here, we focused on honey bees and used the proboscis extension response (PER) protocol to assess whether B. bassiana affects individual sucrose responsiveness, non-associative and associative olfactory learning and memory. Fungus-treated bees displayed an enhanced sucrose responsiveness, which could not be explained by metabolic alterations. Strikingly, exposed bees were twice as inconsistent as controls in response to sucrose, showing PER to lower but not to higher sucrose concentrations. Exposed bees habituated less to sucrose and had a better acquisition performance in the conditioning phase than controls. Further, neither mid- nor long-term memory were affected by the fungus. As sucrose responsiveness is the main determinant of division of foraging labour, these changes might unsettle the numerical ratio between the sub-castes of foragers leading to suboptimal foraging. Although the use of biocontrol strategies should be preferred over chemical pesticides, careful assessment of their side-effects is crucial before claiming that they are safe for pollinators.

Indexed as

AnimalsAssociation LearningBeesBehavior, AnimalConditioning, ClassicalMemoryPesticidesSmellSucroseSweetening AgentsPesticidesSucroseSweetening Agents

Identifiers

PMID33199794
PMCPMC7670424

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.