ArticleJournal of economic entomology2024
Lure specificity, phenology, and damage caused by Epiphyas moths (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in Western Australian apple orchards.
Article in Journal of economic entomology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
Multiple Epiphyas species inhabit southwestern Western Australia, including Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM) Epiphyas postvittana (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), a globally significant, polyphagous pest. This study evaluated the efficacy and specificity of lures designed for 3 Epiphyas species: E. postvittana, Epiphyas pulla (Turner), and the undescribed Epiphyas sp. (1) (Common). Additionally, the study sought to determine the presence and distribution of Epiphyas species in 3 significant apple-growing localities. Trapping, together with partial sequencing of the mitochondrial COI gene, found LBAM to be restricted to the Perth Hills and E. pulla, to apple orchards near Manjimup and Pemberton. This geographic disjunction remains unexplained. Epiphyas sp. (1) was not recorded despite using a specifically designed lure. The E. pulla and LBAM traps demonstrated superior efficacy in capturing their target species, while the catch in Epiphyas sp. (1) traps did not significantly differ between the 2. Both E. pulla and LBAM exhibited peak abundance from late spring to the end of summer (October-February), with variations in timing and peak catch of male moths across species, locations, and years. Surveys conducted in April during the harvest period (February-May), when moth traps caught an average of 1-1.8 moths/trap/week, found no Epiphyas larvae or damage on 140,400 mature apples or on 26,000 leaves. While E. pulla and LBAM traps effectively monitor their target moths, genetic identification of trap catch would be necessary if they co-occurred. Encouragingly, the results indicate that both species become relatively rare as harvest season approaches, and neither inflicts significant damage to mature apples under existing management.
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.