ArticlePest management science2022
Is what you see what you get? The relationship between field observed and laboratory observed aphid parasitism rates in canola fields.
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 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improved impact from the use of beneficial natural enemy species in Australian canola systems: challenges and required tools.Pest management science · 2026Article
- A rapidly spreading deleterious aphid endosymbiont that uses horizontal as well as vertical transmission.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEstimating parasitoid abundance in the field can be difficult, even more so when attempting to quantify parasitism rates and the ecosystem service of biological control that parasitoids can provide. To understand how 'field observed' parasitism rates (in-field mummy counts) of the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) translate to 'laboratory observed' parasitism rates (laboratory-reared parasitoid counts), field work was undertaken in Australian canola fields, over the winter growing season.
resultsOverall, laboratory observed parasitism was on average 2.4 times higher than field observed parasitism, with rates an average of four-fold higher in fields from South Australia. Total field observed and laboratory observed parasitism rates (OPRs) of M. persicae varied considerably across regions, but less so among fields within regions. As crop growth stage progressed, the incidence of field observed mummies increased. The incidence of total parasitoids reared also increased with crop growth stage, averaging 3.4% during flowering and reaching 14.4% during podding/senescing. Although there was a greater diversity of reared parasitoid species at later crop growth stages, the laboratory OPR was unaffected by parasitoid species. Diaeretiella rapae was the most commonly reared parasitoid, increasing in absolute abundance with crop growth stage.
conclusionThese findings indicate that field mummy counts alone do not provide a clear representation of parasitism within canola fields. © 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.