ArticleJournal of chemical ecology2026
One-mark Fits All: Strong Cross Recognition of Host Marking Pheromone Among Anastrepha Species (Diptera: Tephritidae).
Article in Journal of chemical ecology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cross recognition of host marking pheromones (HMP) has been reported among different groups/species of insects but is still a poorly understood phenomenon. Here, using electrophysiological and behavioral bioassays we compared the cross-recognition response of eight Anastrepha species (belonging to different groups in the phylogenetic tree of the genus) to each other's feces extracts (putatively including host marking pheromones) and to feces extracts of Ceratitis capitata and two Rhagoletis species (pomonella and cerasi). We also tested the response of C. capitata to Anastrepha spp. feces extracts. For electrophysiology, solutions of sucrose or KCl were used as positive and negative stimuli respectively. Behavioral bioassays (including natural marks) indicated complete HMP cross recognition (i.e., "Discrimination Coefficient" of more than 50%) among the four Anastrepha species tested. Furthermore, lower but still positive responses were observed in C. capitata females when exposed to the HMP of A. ludens, A. serpentina and A. obliqua. However, only A. serpentina females responded to C. capitata feces extracts in the behavioral bioassays. Electrophysiology tests demonstrated that A. ludens females recognized the HMP of seven congeners including the non-marking ones A. curvicauda and A. bezzii. Additionally, A. ludens, A. obliqua and A. serpentina females responded to male A. ludens feces extracts. Finally, A. serpentina male feces extracts elicited electrophysiological response in females of A. serpentina or A. striata. These results indicate that, in Anastrepha, HMP is produced by females and males, including females of species which do not exhibit the typical marking behavior of dragging their aculeus. We discuss the possibility that the HMP in Anastrepha is an exaptation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42758242What 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.