Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35975443›Full record

SynthesisProceedings. Biological sciences2022

The effects of ants on pest control: a meta-analysis.

Diego V Anjos, Alejandro Tena, Arleu Barbosa Viana-Junior, Raquel L Carvalho, Helena Torezan-Silingardi, Kleber Del-Claro, Ivette Perfecto

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
13.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The effects of ants on pest control: a meta-analysis.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Diego V AnjosInstituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais 38405-302, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-3104-9988
Alejandro TenaCentro de Protección Vegetal y Biotecnología, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Agrarias (IVIA), Moncada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5001-4334
Arleu Barbosa Viana-JuniorPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Biodiversidade e Evolução, Coordenação de Zoologia, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Belém, Para 66077-830, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9964-9875
Raquel L CarvalhoInstituto de Estudos Avançados, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 05508-020, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3734-0271
Helena Torezan-SilingardiInstituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais 38405-302, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0393-869X
Kleber Del-ClaroInstituto de Biologia, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais 38405-302, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8886-9568
Ivette PerfectoSchool for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1749-7191
Universidade Federal de Uberlândia · BRInstituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Agrarias · ESMuseu Paraense Emílio Goeldi · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Environmental impacts of conventional agriculture have generated interest in sustainable agriculture. Biological pest control is a fundamental tool, and ants are key players providing ecological services, as well as some disservices. We have used a meta-analytical approach to investigate the contribution of ants to biological control, considering their effects on pest and natural enemy abundance, plant damage and crop yield. We also evaluated whether the effects of ants are modulated by traits of ants, pests and other natural enemies, as well as by field size, crop system and experiment duration. Overall (considering all meta-analyses), from 52 studies on 17 different crops, we found that ants decrease the abundance of non-honeydew-producing pests, decrease plant damage and increase crop yield (services). In addition, ants decrease the abundance of natural enemies, mainly the generalist ones, and increase honeydew-producing pest abundance (disservices). We show that the pest control and plant protection provided by ants are boosted in shaded crops compared to monocultures. Furthermore, ants increase crop yield in shaded crops, and this effect increases with time. Finally, we bring new insights such as the importance of shaded crops to ant services, providing a good tool for farmers and stakeholders considering sustainable farming practices.

Indexed as

AntsAgricultureAnimalsCrops, AgriculturalPest Control, Biologicalbeneficial insectscrop managementherbivoryproductivitysustainability

Identifiers

PMID35975443
PMCPMC9382213
OpenAlexW4292080423

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.