ArticlePest management science2026
Dose-response modelling uncovers compound-specific inhibitory effects of host defence volatiles on mountain pine beetle fungal symbionts.
Article in Pest management science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pine monoterpenes drive growth, competition, and volatile metabolism of symbiotic fungi associated with the mountain pine beetle.FEMS microbiology letters · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe mountain pine beetle relies on symbiotic fungi to overcome host tree defences, yet these fungi must tolerate the toxic volatile compounds produced by their hosts. However, how individual volatiles affect fungal symbionts and whether these effects constrain fungal performance when exposed to such toxic compounds remain poorly understood. Quantifying the responses of mountain pine beetle fungal symbionts to host defence volatiles can help explain growth constraints within beetle-fungus symbioses in host trees.
resultsWe evaluated the toxicity of eight pine defence volatiles, seven monoterpenes and one phenylpropene, 4-allylanisole, on the three primary fungal symbionts, Grosmannia clavigera, Leptographium longiclavatum and Ophiostoma montium, of the mountain pine beetle in vitro. Fungal cultures were exposed to a range of concentrations of each volatile, and individual growth responses were quantified to determine dose-response relationships. All volatiles reduced fungal growth, except for (-)-α-pinene against L. longiclavatum, although sensitivity varied substantially among fungal species and volatiles. Grosmannia clavigera was overall the most strongly inhibited. We found that toxicity differed between enantiomers. Among the volatiles tested, 4-allylanisole and terpinolene were highly toxic to fungi, whereas (-)-α-pinene was the least inhibitory overall. Even with comparable concentrations at intermediate inhibitory potency, some volatiles (e.g. 3-carene) required much higher concentrations to achieve near-complete growth inhibition.
conclusionThese findings show that pine defence volatiles exert differential, compound-specific impacts on the fungal symbionts of mountain pine beetles, suggesting that chemical diversity in tree defences may enhance their defences by simultaneously targeting multiple components of the beetle-fungus symbioses. © 2026 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.