ArticleInsects2021
Vertical Trapping of the Coffee Berry Borer,
Article in Insects, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vertical and temporal flight patterns of coffee berry borer (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Hawaii.Environmental entomology · 2024Article
- Effect of Microclimate on the Mass Emergence ofInsects · 2024Article
- Coffee Berry Borer,Insects · 2023Article
- Review
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
The coffee industry loses millions of dollars annually worldwide due to the Coffee Berry Borer (CBB); these losses imply a decrease in quality and production. Traps are used to monitor their flight and for pest control. The main objective of this study was to determine the capture pattern and trap capture percentages of the CBB population over time using column traps (CTs) in two independent field experiments. CTs were composed of four traps installed at four different heights 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 m above ground. Our results demonstrated a significant difference in CBB capture by traps placed at different heights above the ground. The CT capture maintained a pattern throughout this study's lag: the lower the height, the greater the percentage of CBBs captured. The study was conducted in two independent experiments (A and B). In Experiment A and B, the traps placed at 0.5 m caught 67% and 85% of the CBBs captured, respectively. Furthermore, the trap set at 1.5 m above the ground in the multi-level CT showed a higher capture percentage than the single placed trap (ST, also at 1.5 m about ground). The pattern of the capture and proportion of the CBB in the CTs was maintained throughout the study despite the season, changes in temperature, and relative air humidity. We suggest that CTs could be explored as a useful tool for capturing the CBB, considering its monitoring and management.
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.