The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Diversity and geographic distribution of secondary endosymbiotic bacteria in natural populations of the pea aphid,Acyrthosiphon pisum
Abstract
In addition to the essential intracellular symbiotic bacterium Buchnera, several facultative endosymbiotic bacteria called collectively secondary symbionts (S‐symbionts) have been identified from the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum. We conducted an extensive and systematic survey of S‐symbionts in Japanese local populations of A. pisum using a specific PCR detection technique. Five S‐symbionts of A. pisum, PASS, PAUS, PABS,Rickettsia and Spiroplasma, and two facultative endosymbionts universally found in various insects,Wolbachia and Arsenophonus, were targeted. Of 119 isofemale strains originating from 81 localities, 66.4% of the strains possessed either of four S‐symbionts: PASS (38.7%); PAUS (16.0%);Rickettsia(8.4%); and Spiroplasma(3.4%), while 33.6% of the strains contained only Buchnera. PABS,Wolbachia and Arsenophonus were not detected from the Japanese strains of A. pisum. In order to understand intra‐ and interpopulational diversity of S‐symbiont microbiota in detail, 858 insects collected from 43 localities were examined for infection with the four S‐symbionts. It was demonstrated that different S‐symbionts coexist commonly in the same local populations, but double infections with two S‐symbionts were rarely detected. Notably, the S‐symbionts exhibited characteristic geographical distribution patterns: PASS at high frequencies all over Japan; PAUS at high frequencies mainly in the northeastern part of Japan; and Rickettsia and Spiroplasma at low frequencies sporadically in the southwestern part of Japan. These results indicate that the geographical distribution and infection frequency of the S‐symbionts, in particular PAUS, might be affected by environmental and/or historical factors. Statistical analyses suggested that the distribution of PAUS infection might be related to host plant species, temperature and precipitation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
BIOLOGY OF BACTERIOCYTE-ASSOCIATED ENDOSYMBIONTS OF PLANT SAP-SUCKING INSECTS
Baumann, P. (2005) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.59.030804.121041 · Cited by 1,050
Hurst, G. D. D., & Jiggins, F. M. (2005) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3056 · Cited by 855
Bacterial symbionts in insects or the story of communities affecting communities
Ferrari, J., & Vavre, F. (2011) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0226 · Cited by 334
Corby‐Harris, V., & Promislow, D. E. L. (2008) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01399.x · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Tsuchida, T., Koga, R., Shibao, H., Matsumoto, T., & Fukatsu, T.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-09-23
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2123-2135
- ISSN
- 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-294X
- OpenAlex
- W2108466836
- Cited by
- 319
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diversity and geographic distribution of secondary endosymbiotic bacteria in natural populations of the pea aphid,Acyrthosiphon pisum. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-294x.2002.01606.x
- The paper
- Tsuchida, T., Koga, R., Shibao, H., Matsumoto, T., & Fukatsu, T. (2002). Diversity and geographic distribution of secondary endosymbiotic bacteria in natural populations of the pea aphid,Acyrthosiphon pisum. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-294x.2002.01606.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.