ArticlePest management science2025
Negative impacts of insecticide-treated methods and slot traps for trapping of Ips cembrae on nontarget invertebrates.
Article in Pest management science, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIps cembrae is serious forest pest of European larch (Larix decidua). The negative impacts on nontarget invertebrates of the use of different I. cembrae trapping methods has not yet been evaluated, although mortality of nontarget invertebrates may occur.
resultsBetween 2016 and 2022, the impact of different I. cembrae trapping methods on nontarget invertebrates was assessed. Four trapping methods (slot traps, insecticide-treated tripods, logs and trees) baited with the pheromone lure Cembräwit were tested. Based on larval feeding habits, the captured nontarget invertebrates were grouped into four feeding types: predators, phloexylophagous, saproxylophagous and mycetophagous. The results indicate that predators, especially the clerid beetle Thanasimus formicarius, were the most negatively affected group of nontarget invertebrates. A negative effect on a number of IUCN Red List species also was shown, particularly on Corticeus fraxini (Tenebrionidae). The results show that Cembräwit-baited slot traps capture not only I. cembrae, but also other serious forest pests such as I. sexdentatus and Pityogenes chalcographus. The overall effect of different trapping methods on I. cembrae population densities has not been studied; however, our results indicate that the use of insecticide-treated methods has a negative effect on I. cembrae predators.
conclusionThe negative effect on the predators may be sufficiently large to outweigh any benefits gained from a reduction in I. cembrae numbers resulting from trapping. Therefore, in order to reduce the negative impacts on nontarget invertebrates, properly timed and consistent salvage logging should be used rather than insecticide-treated trapping methods. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
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.