ArticlePest management science2022
Fear effects on bank voles (Rodentia: Arvicolinae): testing for repellent candidates from predator volatiles.
Article in Pest management science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predator- and killed prey-induced fears bear significant cost to an invasive spider mite: Implications in pest management.Pest management science · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArvicolinae rodents are known pests causing damage to both agricultural and forest crops. Today, rodenticides for rodent control are widely discouraged owing to their negative effects on the environment. Rodents are the main prey for several predators, and their complex olfactory system allows them to identify risks of predation. Therefore, the potential use of predators' scents as repellents has gained interest as an ecologically based rodent control method. In a two-choice experiment, we investigated the potential repellent effects of five synthetic predator compounds: 2-phenylethylamine (2-PEA), 2-propylthietane (2-PT), indole, heptanal and 2,5-dihydro-2,4,5-trimethylthiazoline (TMT), at 1% and 5% doses, using the bank vole (Myodes glareolus) as a rodent model.
resultsThe compound 2-PEA reduced both the food contacts and the time spent by voles in the treatment arm compared to the control arm. Likewise, 2-PT-treated arms reduced the food contacts, and the voles spent less time there, although this latter difference was not significant. Indole also showed a tendency to reduce the time spent at the treatment arm; however, this result was not significant. Unexpectedly, TMT had the reverse effect in showing attractive properties, possibly due to odor cues from differently sized predators and intraguild predation in nature. We found no dose-related effects for any compounds tested.
conclusionOur results suggest that the 2-PEA and 2-PT are both effective odor stimuli for triggering reduced food contacts and area avoidance, and they may be good repellent candidates. We suggest further testing of 2-PEA and 2-PT in field experiments to further determine their dose-efficiency as repellents against rodents in more natural environments. © 2022 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
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.