Abstract
It is unarguably important that insecticides suppress target pest populations, but the primary goal for successful management of vectors of plant diseases should be to minimize the feeding by all life stages on the crop. Thus, it is paramount that comprehensive testing of insecticides includes assessments of how they affect probing and feeding behavior and oviposition. In this laboratory study, we counted number of stylet sheaths (indication of probing and feeding), total oviposition, and mortality of adult potato psyllids, Bactericera cockerelli (Sulc) (Hemiptera: Psyllidae) when exposed to potato leaves treated with abamectin, flonicamid, novaluron, distilled water, and a surfactant. Treatments with abamectin, flonicamid and novaluron caused significant decreases in both oviposition and numbers of stylet sheaths. Choice test was included to simulate incomplete leaf coverage, and the results highlighted the importance of including the effect of canopy coverage (application method) in performance analysis of insecticides.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 4
Claim · model-written summary
Abamectin significantly decreased potato psyllid oviposition and stylet sheaths.
- Taxon
- potato
Solanum tuberosumt0 - Treatment
- abamectine0
- Interactor
- potato psyllids
Bactericera cockerellit0pest - Outcome
- oviposition and numbers of stylet sheathse0
- Direction
- decreasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments with abamectin, flonicamid and novaluron caused significant decreases in both oviposition and numbers of stylet sheaths.”
t0“potato psyllids”
Claim · model-written summary
Flonicamid significantly decreased potato psyllid oviposition and stylet sheaths.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
- Treatment
- flonicamide0
- Interactor
- potato psyllidsBactericera cockerellit0pest
- Outcome
- oviposition and numbers of stylet sheathse0
- Direction
- decreasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments with abamectin, flonicamid and novaluron caused significant decreases in both oviposition and numbers of stylet sheaths.”
t0“potato psyllids”
Claim · model-written summary
Novaluron significantly decreased potato psyllid oviposition and stylet sheaths.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
- Treatment
- novalurone0
- Interactor
- potato psyllidsBactericera cockerellit0pest
- Outcome
- oviposition and numbers of stylet sheathse0
- Direction
- decreasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments with abamectin, flonicamid and novaluron caused significant decreases in both oviposition and numbers of stylet sheaths.”
t0“potato psyllids”
Claim · model-written summary
Choice tests showed canopy coverage matters when analyzing insecticide performance.
- Taxon
- potatoSolanum tuberosumt0
- Outcome
- importance of including the effect of canopy coveragee0
- Comparator
- incomplete leaf coveragee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Choice test was included to simulate incomplete leaf coverage, and the results highlighted the importance of including the effect of canopy coverage (application method) in performance analysis of insecticides.”
t0“potato psyllids”
The same questions in other papers
abamectin · Bactericera cockerelli · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.