trap barrier · Pest · Camellia sinensis (black tea)

Results agree5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 claims from these papers; 1 citation between them.

How these papers cite each other

1 citation between these papers: 1 on the same side, 0 across the two sides.

Positive resultNegative result or no effect20022004200620082010201220142016
  • Positive result
  • Negative result or no effect
  • Citation, pointing to the cited paper
  • Citation across the two sides
  • Larger circle: more citations overall

Years run left to right. Citations come from the papers’ OpenAlex reference lists. Hover a paper to bring forward its citations; click it to open the paper.

Papers reporting a positive result 5

  1. The control Effectiveness of Tea Tussock moth(Euproctis pseudoconspersa)with Synthetic Sex Pheromone by Mass Trapping · 2002

    cited by 1 paper here

  2. Behavioral responses for evaluating the attractiveness of specific tea shoot volatiles to the tea green leafhopper, Empoaca vitis · 2011

    cites 1 paper here

  3. Relationship between the damage degree of tea longhorn beetle larvae and the distances of tea clumps to trap lamp and roadside · 2011

  4. Effect of Shade Net on Reduction of Freezing Damage at a Tea Garden · 2014

  5. Effect of Trap Color, Height, and Orientation on the Capture of Yellow and Stick Tea Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) and Nontarget Insects in Tea Gardens · 2016

A paper is on the positive side when any of its claims here is positive. Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. Claims that compare genotypes are left out; a claim about lacking a nutrient counts the other way round in that nutrient’s question. “Results differ” marks a question where two model reviewers, reading both claims, accepted at least one pair of papers whose results differ.

trap barrier on Camellia sinensis (black tea) against other targets

trap barrier · pest on other organisms