Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34203229›Full record

ArticleInsects2021

Biological Control of Pest Non-Marine Molluscs: A Pacific Perspective on Risks to Non-Target Organisms.

Carl C Christensen, Robert H Cowie, Norine W Yeung, Kenneth A Hayes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insects, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Carl C ChristensenBernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA.
Robert H CowieBernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2986-7092
Norine W YeungBernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA.
Kenneth A HayesBernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0814-483X

Funding

National Science Foundation DEB-1656254, 1656231, 1837849U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service F20AC11607
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Classic biological control of pest non-marine molluscs has a long history of disastrous outcomes, and despite claims to the contrary, few advances have been made to ensure that contemporary biocontrol efforts targeting molluscs are safe and effective. For more than half a century, malacologists have warned of the dangers in applying practices developed in the field of insect biological control, where biocontrol agents are often highly host-specific, to the use of generalist predators and parasites against non-marine mollusc pests. Unfortunately, many of the lessons that should have been learned from these failed biocontrol programs have not been rigorously applied to contemporary efforts. Here, we briefly review the failures of past non-marine mollusc biocontrol efforts in the Pacific islands and their adverse environmental impacts that continue to reverberate across ecosystems. We highlight the fact that none of these past programs has ever been demonstrated to be effective against targeted species, and at least two (the snails

Indexed as

biological controlEuglandinanon-target impactsPhasmarhabditisPlatydemusSarcophagidaeSciomyzidaeslugssnails

Identifiers

PMID34203229
PMCPMC8305845

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.