ArticlePloS one2021
Morphometric and molecular discrimination of the sugarcane aphid, Melanaphis sacchari, (Zehntner, 1897) and the sorghum aphid Melanaphis sorghi (Theobald, 1904).
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two atypical resistance proteins confer plant resistance to Melanaphis sorghi in sorghum.Plant communications · 2026Article
- Transcriptome analysis and characterization of cathepsin B-like protein inMolecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement · 2026Article
- Ancient pangenomic origins of noncanonical NLR genes underlying the recent evolutionary rescue of a staple crop.Science advances · 2025Article
- Sugarcane yellow leaf virus impairs the transcriptomic defense response of sugarcane to its new aphid vector Melanaphis sorghi.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- Melanaphis sacchari/sorghi complex: current status, challenges and integrated strategies for managing the invasive sap-feeding insect pest of sorghum.Pest management science · 2025Review
- Sorghum aphid/greenbug: current research and control strategies to accelerate the breeding of aphid-resistant sorghum.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- Article
- A Review of Biological Control One Decade After the Sorghum Aphid (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Detecting sorghum aphid infestation in grain sorghum using leaf spectral response.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Globally deployed sorghum aphid resistance gene RMES1 is vulnerable to biotype shifts but is bolstered by RMES2.The plant genome · 2024Article
- Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on the Biological Control of Aphids on Winter Cereals by Parasitoids in South America.Neotropical entomology · 2023Review
- Article
- Article
- Parasitoids and Predators of the Invasive AphidInsects · 2022Article
- Article
- Host plant resistance, foliar insecticide application and natural enemies play a role in the management ofFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Natural Enemies, Mediated by Landscape and Weather Conditions, Shape Response of the Sorghum Agroecosystem of North America to the Invasive AphidFrontiers in insect science · 2022Article
- Quantifying the impacts of symbiotic interactions between two invasive species: the tawny crazy ant (PeerJ · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Melanaphis sacchari (Zehntner, 1897) and Melanaphis sorghi (Theobald, 1904) are major worldwide crop pests causing direct feeding damage on sorghum and transmitting viruses to sugarcane. It is common in the scientific literature to consider these two species as synonyms, referred to as the 'sugarcane aphid', although no formal study has validated this synonymy. In this study, based on the comparison of samples collected from their whole distribution area, we use both morphometric and molecular data to better characterize the discrimination between M. sacchari and M. sorghi. An unsupervised multivariate analysis of morphometric data clearly confirmed the separation of the two species. The best discriminating characters separating these species were length of the antenna processus terminalis relative to length of hind tibia, siphunculus or cauda. However, those criteria sometimes do not allow an unambiguous identification. Bayesian clustering based on microsatellite data delimited two clusters, which corresponded to the morphological species separation. The DNA sequencing of three nuclear and three mitochondrial regions revealed slight divergence between species. In particular, the COI barcode region proved to be uninformative for species separation because one haplotype is shared by both species. In contrast, one SNP located on the nuclear EF1-α gene was diagnostic for species separation. Based on morphological and molecular evidence, the invasive genotype damaging to sorghum in the US, Mexico and the Caribbean since 2013 is found to be M. sorghi.
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.