ArticlePloS one2022
Physiological and transcriptional immune responses of a non-model arthropod to infection with different entomopathogenic groups.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biocontrol Mechanisms of a ChineseInsects · 2026Article
- Article
- Immune Reactions of Vector Insects to Parasites and Pathogens.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Effects of the Entomopathogenic FungusInsects · 2023Article
- Review
- Hemocyte response to treatment of susceptible and resistant Asian corn borer (Frontiers in immunology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Insect immune responses to multiple pathogen groups including viruses, bacteria, fungi, and entomopathogenic nematodes have traditionally been documented in model insects such as Drosophila melanogaster, or medically important insects such as Aedes aegypti. Despite their potential importance in understanding the efficacy of pathogens as biological control agents, these responses are infrequently studied in agriculturally important pests. Additionally, studies that investigate responses of a host species to different pathogen groups are uncommon, and typically focus on only a single time point during infection. As such, a robust understanding of immune system responses over the time of infection is often lacking in many pest species. This study was conducted to understand how 3rd instar larvae of the major insect pest Helicoverpa zea responded through the course of an infection by four different pathogenic groups: viruses, bacteria, fungi, and entomopathogenic nematodes; by sampling at three different times post-inoculation. Physiological immune responses were assessed at 4-, 24-, and 48-hours post-infection by measuring hemolymph phenoloxidase concentrations, hemolymph prophenoloxidase concentrations, hemocyte counts, and encapsulation ability. Transcriptional immune responses were measured at 24-, 48-, and 72-hours post-infection by quantifying the expression of PPO2, Argonaute-2, JNK, Dorsal, and Relish. This gene set covers the major known immune pathways: phenoloxidase cascade, siRNA, JNK pathway, Toll pathway, and IMD pathway. Our results indicate H. zea has an extreme immune response to Bacillus thuringiensis bacteria, a mild response to Helicoverpa armigera nucleopolyhedrovirus, and little-to-no detectable response to either the fungus Beauveria bassiana or Steinernema carpocapsae nematodes.
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.