ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2023
Naïve Pine Terpene Response to the Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) through the Seasons.
Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Amplicon-Based Profiling of Fungal Communities Associated with Scots Pine Bark Beetles: Selective Antagonism and Monoterpene Tolerance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Climate indirectly modulates tree survival of spruce beetle attacks via effects on constitutive and induced secondary metabolites.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Biological Barriers to Forest Pest Invasions: A Novel Host Tree Slows Mountain Pine Beetle Range Expansion.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Insect herbivores must contend with constitutive and induced plant defenses. The mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Scolytinae) has expanded its range east of the Rocky Mountains into the western boreal forest and is encountering evolutionarily naïve lodgepole pines (Pinus contorta) and jack pines (Pinus banksiana). Pinus contorta and P. banksiana in the expanded range have different constitutive and induced defenses in response to wounding and inoculation with fungal associates of D. ponderosae. In the historic range, previous studies have examined phloem terpene content prior to and just after D. ponderosae mass attack, but the terpene profile of attacked trees post-overwintering is unknown. We examined the response of mature P. contorta and P. banksiana trees to experimentally-applied mass attack by D. ponderosae and quantified phloem terpenes at three time points, pre-attack, post-attack (same season), and the following spring, post-overwintering. Phloem content of total terpenes as well as many individual terpenes increased after D. ponderosae attack but were only significantly higher than pre-attack levels at the post-overwintering time point in both P. contorta and P. banksiana. The absence of a significant increase in phloem terpenes in the month following attack in naïve pines is a potential cause for increased D. ponderosae offspring production reported in naïve P. contorta. Beetle attack density did not influence the phloem terpene profiles of either species and there was no significant interaction between attack density and sampling time on terpene content. High phloem terpenes in trees that are attacked at low densities could prime these trees for defense against attacks in the following season but it could also make these trees more apparent to early-foraging beetles and facilitate efficient mass attack at low D. ponderosae population densities in the expanded range.
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.