Paper · 2021 · Entomological Research

Response of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to salt‐stressed maize plants

Zai‐Ling Wang; Muhammad Haseeb; Run‐Zhi Zhang

4
claims
5
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Abstract Salt‐stressed maize is an economically important crop in many arid and semi‐arid regions of the world where soil salinization is most common, and the invasive fall armyworm (FAW) Spodoptera frugiperda threatens global maize production. It thus poses a puzzle of whether FAW populations feeding on salt‐stressed maize plants are becoming more or less invasive. Here, we evaluated the FAW response to salt‐stressed maize plants by examining effects of salt‐stressed maize plants on FAW survival, development and fecundity. We found a longer larval development time (salt‐stressed, 12.9 ± 0.8 d; non‐stressed, 11.3 ± 0.4 d), but unaffected survival rate and pupal mass accumulation in FAW feeding on salt‐stressed maize plants. Moreover, the lifetime egg production of FAW females feeding on salt‐stressed maize plants (633.5 ± 62.7 eggs) was reduced by nearly half compared with those feeding on non‐stressed maize plants (1255.9 ± 70.3 eggs). Overall, FAW showed a negative response to salt‐stressed maize plants. Due to limited population increase potential, FAW populations feeding on salt‐stressed maize plants should pose less of a problem than ones feeding on non‐stressed maize plants do. In practice, salt‐stressed maize plants are quite common in arid and semi‐arid regions where the relatively high‐salinity groundwater is often used to irrigate maize plants, potentially limiting FAW population size. Thus, salt‐stressed maize plants would contribute to practical applications of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies in controlling FAW.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Larval development time of FAW was longer on salt-stressed maize plants (12.9 ± 0.8 d) than on non-stressed maize plants (11.3 ± 0.4 d).

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
salt‐stressed maize plantse0
Interactor
FAWe0pest
Outcome
larval development timee1
Direction
longere1
Value
12.9 ± 0.8 de1
Qualifier
11.3 ± 0.4 de1
Comparator
non‐stressede1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“effects of salt‐stressed maize plants on FAW survival, development and fecundity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 448–528 · show in text ↑
e1

“We found a longer larval development time (salt‐stressed, 12.9 ± 0.8 d; non‐stressed, 11.3 ± 0.4 d)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 530–629 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Survival rate and pupal mass accumulation of FAW were unaffected by feeding on salt-stressed maize plants.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse2
Treatment
salt‐stressed maize plantse2
Interactor
FAWe2pest
Outcome
survival rate and pupal mass accumulatione2
Direction
no_changeinferrede2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“but unaffected survival rate and pupal mass accumulation in FAW feeding on salt‐stressed maize plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 631–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lifetime egg production of FAW females was reduced by nearly half on salt-stressed maize plants (633.5 ± 62.7 eggs) compared with non-stressed maize plants (1255.9 ± 70.3 eggs).

Taxon
maizeZea mayse3
Treatment
salt‐stressed maize plantse3
Interactor
FAWe3pest
Outcome
lifetime egg production of FAW femalese3
Direction
reducede3
Value
nearly halfe3
Qualifier
1255.9 ± 70.3 eggse3
Comparator
non‐stressed maize plantse3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e3

“the lifetime egg production of FAW females feeding on salt‐stressed maize plants (633.5 ± 62.7 eggs) was reduced by nearly half compared with those feeding on non‐stressed maize plants (1255.9 ± 70.3 eggs)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–949 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Salt-stressed maize plants would contribute to practical applications of integrated pest management strategies against FAW.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse4
Interactor
FAWe4pest
Outcome
practical applications of integrated pest management (IPM) strategiese4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“Thus, salt‐stressed maize plants would contribute to practical applications of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies in controlling FAW”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1419–1560 · show in text ↑

salinity · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Results differ

52 papers: 12 positive, 40 negative or no effect

39 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

48 papers more in this group

See all 52 papers →

salinity · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.