ArticleInsects2022
Evidence for Reconsidering the Taxonomic Status of Closely Related
Article in Insects, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Convergent evolution revealed by paraphyly and polyphyly of many taxa of oribatid mites: A molecular approach.Experimental & applied acarology · 2024Article
- Interspecific interaction network of mites associated with mango trees.Experimental & applied acarology · 2024Article
- World species of the subgenus Oligonychus (Reckiella) Tuttle and Baker (Acari, Prostigmata, Tetranychidae), diagnostic keys, taxonomic notes, and a new species.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To elucidate the taxonomic problems in species delineation within the Oligonychus punicae complex (O. punicae, O. mangiferus, and O. vitis) (Acari: Prostigmata: Tetranychidae), we performed morphological and molecular investigations on mite samples, collected from different hosts/countries. Thirty-nine samples of punicae complex, collected from Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia (SA), did not show any considerable morphological differences in females and males. All 39 samples of the punicae complex resembled the original description of O. punicae, while the claimed Mexican O. punicae was distinctively different based on male aedeagus. Molecularly, the low nucleotide diversity ranged from 0% to 2.1% (ITS2-rDNA) and 0% to 1% (COI-mtDNA), and was observed among various DNA sequences of the punicae complex from Egypt, India, Israel, Pakistan, and SA, confirming their identity as one species. The high genetic divergence ranged from 17.2% to 18.8% (ITS2) and 9.2% to 10.2% (COI), observed between the claimed Mexican O. punicae and all other sequences of the punicae complex, indicating that the Mexican sample do not belong to O. punicae. Basing our findings on both morphological and molecular data, we can conclude that O. mangiferus and O. vitis are synonymized with O. punicae. Additionally, this study reveals that the claimed Mexican O. punicae needs to be re-identified.
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.