Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35624177›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Electroantennogram and machine learning reveal a volatile blend mediating avoidance behavior by Tuta absoluta females to a wild tomato plant.

Raphael Njurai Miano, Pascal Mahukpe Ayelo, Richard Musau, Ahmed Hassanali, Samira A Mohamed

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Olfactory Responses ofInsects · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Raphael Njurai MianoInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. rmiano@icipe.org.ORCID 0000-0003-3399-8439
Pascal Mahukpe AyeloInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0002-0027-2546
Richard MusauDepartment of Chemistry, Kenyatta University, P.O Box 43844-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Ahmed HassanaliDepartment of Chemistry, Kenyatta University, P.O Box 43844-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Samira A MohamedInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. sfaris@icipe.org.ORCID 0000-0001-6836-7528
Kenyatta University · KEInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology · KE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tomato cultivation is threatened by the infestation of the nocturnal invasive tomato pinworm, Tuta absoluta. This study was based on field observations that a wild tomato plant, Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme, grown in the Mount Kenya region, Kenya, is less attacked by T. absoluta, unlike the cultivated tomato plants like S. lycopersicum (var. Rambo F1). We hypothesized that the wild tomato plant may be actively avoided by gravid T. absoluta females because of the emission of repellent allelochemical constituents. Therefore, we compared infestation levels by the pest in field monocrops and intercrops of the two tomato genotypes, characterized the headspace volatiles, then determined the compounds detectable by the insect through gas chromatography-linked electroantennography (GC-EAG), and finally performed bioassays using a blend of four EAG-active compounds unique to the wild tomato. We found significant reductions in infestation levels in the monocrop of the wild tomato, and intercrops of wild and cultivated tomato plants compared to the monocrop of the cultivated tomato plant. Quantitative and qualitative differences were noted between volatiles of the wild and cultivated tomato plants, and between day and night volatile collections. The most discriminating compounds between the volatile treatments varied with the variable selection or machine learning methods used. In GC-EAG recordings, 16 compounds including hexanal, (Z)-3-hexenol, α-pinene, β-myrcene, α-phellandrene, β-phellandrene, (E)-β-ocimene, terpinolene, limonene oxide, camphor, citronellal, methyl salicylate, (E)-β-caryophyllene, and others tentatively identified as 3,7,7-Trimethyl-1,3,5-cycloheptatriene, germacrene D and cis-carvenone oxide were detected by antennae of T. absoluta females. Among these EAG-active compounds, (Z)-3-hexenol, α-pinene, α-phellandrene, limonene oxide, camphor, citronellal, (E)-β-caryophyllene and β-phellandrene are in the top 5 discriminating compounds highlighted by the machine learning methods. A blend of (Z)-3-hexenol, camphor, citronellal and limonene oxide detected only in the wild tomato showed dose-dependent repellence to T. absoluta females in wind tunnel. This study provides some groundwork for exploiting the allelochemicals of the wild tomato in the development of novel integrated pest management approaches against T. absoluta.

Indexed as

LepidopteraSolanumSolanum lycopersicumVolatile Organic CompoundsAnimalsAvoidance LearningCamphorFemaleMachine LearningPheromonesPlantsCamphorPheromonesVolatile Organic Compounds

Identifiers

PMID35624177
PMCPMC9142488
OpenAlexW4281766269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.