Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37649704›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2023

Puke or poop? Comparison of regurgitate and faecal samples to infer alpine grasshopper (

Warwick J Allen, Lauren P Waller, Barbara I P Barratt, Ian A Dickie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Warwick J AllenBio-Protection Research Centre, School of Biological Sciences University of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1859-1668
Lauren P WallerBioprotection Aotearoa Lincoln University Lincoln New Zealand.
Barbara I P BarrattAgResearch, Invermay Research Centre Mosgiel New Zealand.
Ian A DickieBio-Protection Research Centre, School of Biological Sciences University of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand.
University of Canterbury · NZAgResearch · NZLincoln University · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Characterising plant-herbivore interactions is important to understanding the processes that influence community structure and ecosystem functioning. Traditional methods used to identify plant-herbivore interactions are being superseded by non-destructive molecular approaches that can infer interactions with greater resolution and accuracy from environmental DNA (e.g. faeces and regurgitate). However, few studies have compared the success of using different sample types and whether they provide similar or contrasting information about species' diet. Here we compared the success of DNA amplification and host plant species identification using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) applied to faecal and regurgitate samples collected from alpine grasshoppers

Indexed as

eDNAenvironmental DNAfrassplant‐herbivore interactionsrestriction fragment length polymorphismRFLP

Identifiers

PMID37649704
PMCPMC10463123
OpenAlexW4386246932

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.