↓ Skip to main content

No evidence for change in oviposition behaviour of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) after widespread adoption of transgenic insecticidal cotton

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Entomological Research, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
No evidence for change in oviposition behaviour of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) after widespread adoption of transgenic insecticidal cotton
Published in
Bulletin of Entomological Research, February 2012
DOI 10.1017/s0007485311000848
Pubmed ID
Authors

M.P. Zalucki, J.P. Cunningham, S. Downes, P. Ward, C. Lange, M. Meissle, N.A. Schellhorn, J.M. Zalucki

Abstract

Cotton growing landscapes in Australia have been dominated by dual-toxin transgenic Bt varieties since 2004. The cotton crop has thus effectively become a sink for the main target pest, Helicoverpa armigera. Theory predicts that there should be strong selection on female moths to avoid laying on such plants. We assessed oviposition, collected from two cotton-growing regions, by female moths when given a choice of tobacco, cotton and cabbage. Earlier work in the 1980s and 1990s on populations from the same geographic locations indicated these hosts were on average ranked as high, mid and low preference plants, respectively, and that host rankings had a heritable component. In the present study, we found no change in the relative ranking of hosts by females, with most eggs being laid on tobacco, then cotton and least on cabbage. As in earlier work, some females laid most eggs on cotton and aspects of oviposition behaviour had a heritable component. Certainly, cotton is not avoided as a host, and the implications of these finding for managing resistance to Bt cotton are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 7%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 9 31%
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 59%
Unspecified 9 31%
Environmental Science 2 7%
Engineering 1 3%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 July 2012.
All research outputs
#20,160,460
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Entomological Research
#990
of 1,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,011
of 247,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Entomological Research
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,153 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 247,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.