ArticleLandscape ecology2022
Comparing floral resource maps and land cover maps to predict predators and aphid suppression on field bean.
Article in Landscape ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Effects of temporal floral resource availability and non-crop habitats on broad bean pollination.Landscape ecology · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextPredatory insects contribute to the natural control of agricultural pests, but also use plant pollen or nectar as supplementary food resources. Resource maps have been proposed as an alternative to land cover maps for prediction of beneficial insects.
objectivesWe aimed at predicting the abundance of crop pest predating insects and the pest control service they provide with both, detailed flower resource maps and land cover maps.
methodsWe selected 19 landscapes of 500 m radius and mapped them with both approaches. In the centres of the landscapes, aphid predators - hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae), ladybeetles (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) and lacewings (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) - were surveyed in experimentally established faba bean phytometers (
resultsLandscapes with higher proportions of forest edge as derived from land cover maps supported higher abundance of aphid predators, and high densities of aphid predators reduced aphid infestation on faba bean. Floral resource maps did not significantly predict predator abundance or aphid control services.
conclusionsLand cover maps allowed to relate landscape composition with predator abundance, showing positive effects of forest edges. Floral resource maps may have failed to better predict predators because other resources such as overwintering sites or alternative prey potentially play a more important role than floral resources. More research is needed to further improve our understanding of resource requirements beyond floral resource estimations and our understanding of their role for aphid predators at the landscape scale. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-021-01361-0.
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.