ArticleExperimental & applied acarology2021
Patterns of intraspecific morphological variability in soil mites reflect their dispersal ability.
Article in Experimental & applied acarology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From mites to migration: linking Spinturnix psi morphometrics to the conservation of its host, the common bent-winged bat (Miniopterus schreibersii).Experimental & applied acarology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ability to disperse is one of the most important factors influencing the biogeography of species and speciation processes. Highly mobile species have been shown to lack geographic population structures, whereas less mobile species show genetically strongly subdivided populations which are expected to also display at least subtle phenotypic differences. Geometric morphometric methods (GMM) were now used to analyze morphological differences between European populations of a presumed non-phoretic, little mobile mite species in comparison to a highly mobile, phoretic species. The non-phoretic species Scutacarus carinthiacus showed a phenotypic population structure, whereas the phoretic species S. acarorum displayed homogeneity. These different patterns most probably can be explained by different levels of gene flow due to different dispersal abilities of the two species. GMM proved to be a sensitive tool that is especially recommendable for the analysis of (old) museum material and/or specimens in microscopic slides, which are not suitable for molecular genetic analysis.
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.