Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34694405›Full record

ArticleJournal of economic entomology2021

Pheromone Deployment Strategies for Mating Disruption of a Vineyard Mealybug.

Kent M Daane, Monica L Cooper, Nathan H Mercer, Brian N Hogg, Glenn Y Yokota, David R Haviland, Stephen C Welter, Frances E Cave, Ashfaq A Sial, Elizabeth A Boyd

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of economic entomology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Kent M DaaneDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8052-1954
Monica L CooperDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Nathan H MercerDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Brian N HoggDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Glenn Y YokotaDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
David R HavilandUniversity of California Cooperative Extension, Kern County, 1031 South Mount Vernon, Bakersfield, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6282-289X
Stephen C WelterDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Frances E CaveDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Ashfaq A SialDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5471-1818
Elizabeth A BoydDepartment of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
University of California, Berkeley · USCalifornia State University, Chico · USNapa Valley College · USSan Diego State University · USUniversity of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mealybug, Planococcus ficus (Signoret), is a primary vineyard pest in California and other grape-growing regions throughout the World. Mating disruption programs are commercially available to manage Pl. ficus, but widespread adoption has been limited, in part, by high costs compared with insecticide programs. To improve mating disruption economic effectiveness, different deployment technologies (passive, aerosol, and microencapsulated formulations) were individually examined. Adult male Pl. ficus captures in pheromone traps and categorical ratings of vine infestation or crop damage suggest that all deployment strategies lowered mealybug densities or damage. Using passive dispensers, deployment rates of 310 and 465 per ha lowered Pl. ficus crop damage similar to 615 per ha, a rate commonly used in commercial operations; reduced rates would lower product and deployment costs. Meso dispensers, containing more a.i., deployed at 35 per ha did not have a treatment impact, but a microencapsulated formulation and aerosol canisters lowered male flight captures and/or crop damage. Male mealybug flight activity was greatest from 0500-1100 hr, which coincided with temperatures >16° and <32°C. These restricted times and temperatures suggest programable dispensers might allow pheromone deployment to coincide only with flight patterns. A large field trial using passive dispensers found greater treatment separation after 3 yr of pheromone deployment. Discrepancies in results among vineyards may be related to Pl. ficus density, but combined results from all trials suggest that different deployment technologies can be used to impact Pl. ficus densities and damage, even at reduced rates, especially with continued use over multiple seasons.

Indexed as

MothsSex AttractantsAnimalsFarmsInsect ControlMalePheromonesReproductionSexual Behavior, AnimalPheromonesSex AttractantsPlanococcus ficussemiochemicalsex pheromonesustainable agriculturevineyard pest

Identifiers

PMID34694405
PMCPMC8648387
OpenAlexW3210620743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.