ArticleInsects2022
Colour Response in Western Flower Thrips Varies Intraspecifically.
Article in Insects, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Visual modelling can optimise sticky trap design for simultaneous monitoring of multiple species of insect pests.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Marigold,Insects · 2025Article
- Tracking the flight and landing behaviour of western flower thrips in response to single and two-colour cues.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Colour vision in thrips (Thysanoptera).Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Discrepancies in the published research as to the attraction of the economically important pest western flower thrips (WFT) to different colours confounds the optimisation of field traps for pest management purposes. We considered whether the different experimental conditions of independent studies could have contributed to this. Therefore, the behavioural response (i.e., landings) to different colour cues of two WFT laboratory populations from Germany (DE) and The Netherlands (NL), which had previously been independently shown to have different colour preferences, were tested in the same place, and under the same experimental conditions. Single-choice wind tunnel bioassays supported previous independent findings, with more of a NL population landing on the yellow LED lamp (588 nm) than the blue (470 nm) (p = 0.022), and a not-statistically significant trend observed in a DE population landing more on blue compared to yellow (p = 0.104). To account for potential original host rearing influences, both populations were subsequently established on bean for ~20 weeks, then yellow chrysanthemum for 4−8 and 12−14 weeks and tested in wind tunnel choice bioassays. Laboratory of origin, irrespective of the host plant rearing regime, remained a significant effect (p < 0.001), with 65% of the NL WFT landing on yellow compared to blue (35%), while 66% of the DE WFT landed on blue compared to yellow (34%). There was also a significant host plant effect (p < 0.001), with increased response to yellow independent of laboratory of origin after rearing on chrysanthemum for 12−14 weeks. Results suggest that differing responses of WFT populations to colour is, in this case, independent of the experimental situation. Long-term separate isolation from the wild cannot be excluded as a cause, and the implications of this for optimising the trap colour is discussed.
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.