Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42120913›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Interspecific foraging response to the thiacloprid treatment of co-existing top spider predators.

Anděla Šimečková, Filip Solar, Michaela Kolářová, Eva Líznarová, Stanislav Korenko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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

5 authors.

Anděla ŠimečkováDepartment of Agroecology and Crop Production, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, Suchdol, Praha, 165 00, Czech Republic.
Filip SolarDepartment of Agroecology and Crop Production, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, Suchdol, Praha, 165 00, Czech Republic.
Michaela KolářováDepartment of Agroecology and Crop Production, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, Suchdol, Praha, 165 00, Czech Republic.
Eva LíznarováDepartment of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, Brno, 611 37, Czech Republic.
Stanislav KorenkoDepartment of Agroecology and Crop Production, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, Suchdol, Praha, 165 00, Czech Republic. korenko@af.czu.cz.

Funding

Česká Zemědělská Univerzita v Praze Student Grant Competition 2025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neonicotinoids are nicotine-based synthetic insecticides used in agriculture to control plant pests. They are neurotoxic substances that attack the nervous system of insects and can cause paralysis or death. These selective insecticides should have a negligible effect on non-target organisms, including spiders, which are one of the most abundant and diverse natural predators that contribute to the control of pests. Current studies show that selective insecticides such as neonicotinoids have negative effects on non-target organisms. They can have both lethal effects resulting in mortality, and sublethal effects involving various aspects of their lives, e.g. breeding, movement, hunting, ability to defend against predators, and predatory activity. We studied the species-specific responses to neonicotinoid treatment with the active ingredient thiacloprid of two top spider predators coexisting in tree crowns in Europe - respectively, spiders of the genus Philodromus (aureoles group, Philodromidae) and species Anyphaena accentuata (Walckenaer) (Anyphaenidae). Spiders were exposed to field-realistic concentrations of the tested substance, while the control group was treated with distilled water. We compared the species-specific responses of functional response and two components of predation rate: feeding and overkilling. Further, we monitored long-term survival and recovery from paralysis compared to control, and the impact of insecticide residues on predation rate 14 days post-exposure. We found that a one-hour tarsal contact with thiacloprid significantly reduced predation rate in both Anyphaena and Philodromus spiders, although the effects were highly species-specific. In Anyphaena, feeding was inhibited by fresh treatment, whereas Philodromus remained unaffected in this regard. Furthermore, the rate of overkilling significantly decreased under the fresh treatment in both species. The treatment induced a reversible paralysis in Philodromus, whereas it caused significant mortality in Anyphaena. Furthermore, 14 days post-treatment, the insecticide had no significant effect on feeding of either species, while the overkilling in Philodromus remained significantly lower than in the control. Overall, the study demonstrates a species-specific response to thiacloprid among top pest predators that share the same ecological niche in orchards.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorInsecticidesNeonicotinoidsPredatory BehaviorPyridinesSpidersThiazinesAnimalsSpecies SpecificityInsecticidesNeonicotinoidsPyridinesthiaclopridThiazines

Identifiers

PMID42120913
PMCPMC13351066

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.