Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41798313›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2026

Clashing in Murky Waters: On Amphibian Mosquito Suppression.

S P Boerlijst, A Ummels, A M Spitzen-van der Sluijs, J Spitzen, R W Bouman, E Boelee, P M van Bodegom, M Schrama

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

S P BoerlijstInstitute for Environmental Sciences Leiden, Department of Environmental Biology University of Leiden Leiden the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8957-186X
A UmmelsInstitute for Environmental Sciences Leiden, Department of Environmental Biology University of Leiden Leiden the Netherlands.
A M Spitzen-van der SluijsMinistry of Defence Den Haag the Netherlands.
J SpitzenCentre for Monitoring of Vectors, Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality Wageningen the Netherlands.
R W BoumanHortus Botanicus Leiden Leiden the Netherlands.
E BoeleeDeltares, Division of Inland Water Systems Delft the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7660-5602
P M van BodegomInstitute for Environmental Sciences Leiden, Department of Environmental Biology University of Leiden Leiden the Netherlands.
M SchramaInstitute for Environmental Sciences Leiden, Department of Environmental Biology University of Leiden Leiden the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mosquito-borne diseases are on the rise globally due to the shifting distribution of key disease vector species. Due to increased global trade and travel and increasing temperatures and changing precipitation patterns, the spread of mosquitoes and the increasing burden of their accompanying diseases like malaria, yellow fever, and dengue persist. Seeking sustainable control measures, there's growing interest in natural control, particularly through predators like amphibians, a globally threatened vertebrate group. However, the effectiveness of different natural predators and their role in an ecological context remains poorly understood. This study compares the predator efficiency of common European amphibian species to common aquatic insect mosquito predators. Focusing on the cosmopolitan mosquito

Indexed as

amphibianbiological controlcontrol agentCulex pipiensLissotriton vulgarisPelophylax kl. esculentusurban green spaces

Identifiers

PMID41798313
PMCPMC12966807

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.