| Title |
An exploratory study of energy reserves and biometry as potential tools for assessing the effects of pest management strategies on the earwig, Forficula auricularia L
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11356-018-2371-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Séverine Suchail, Adrien Le Navenant, Yvan Capowiez, Alain Thiéry, Magali Rault |
| Abstract |
Apple orchards are heavily treated crops and some sprayed insecticides are recognized to have toxic effects on non-target arthropods. Earwigs are important natural enemies in pip-fruit orchards and contribute to the biological control of aphids. In addition, due to their ease of capture and identification, they are an interesting potential bioindicator of the possible detrimental effects of different orchard management strategies. In this study, we measured the energy reserves and some morphological traits of Forficula auricularia L. sampled in apple orchards under management strategies (organic versus integrated pest management (IPM)). We observed a significant decrease in mass (22 to 27%), inter-eye width (3%), and prothorax width (2 to 5%) in earwigs from IPM compared to organic orchards. Energy body reserves also confirmed these results with a significant decrease of 48% in glycogen and 25 to 42% in lipid content in earwigs from IPM compared to organic orchards. However, the protein content was approximately 70% higher in earwigs from IPM than in organic orchards. Earwigs sampled in IPM orchards may adapt to minimize the adverse toxic effects of pesticide treatments using a large number of strategies, which are reflected in changes to their energy reserves. These strategies could, in turn, influence the population dynamics of natural enemies and impair their role in the biological control of pests in apple orchards. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 17% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 44% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 June 2018.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#3,738
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,960
of 334,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#89
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.