MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7070547292

Plume interaction and odour source spacing of\npheromone and non-host volatiles : : Behavioural\neffects on bark beetles and moths

2009· other· en· W7070547292 sur OpenAlexfundno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueEpsilon Archive for Student Projects (University of Southampton) · 2009
Typeother
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePublic Health and Nutrition
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesHigher Education Commision, PakistanSvenska Forskningsrådet FormasAlberta Agricultural Research Institute
Mots-clésPlumePheromoneSpodoptera littoralisSex pheromoneBark (sound)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Insects have a remarkable ability to sense whether odours are released from one point source or from two closely separated ones. Therefore it is of interest to study the interactions of pheromone component odour plumes to affect the insect behaviour when the release points of\ndifferent components are physically separated. It helps us to understand the mechanism that insects use to find their host or any attractive source. We studied the behavioural response of Spodoptera littoralis (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) males, in a walking bioassay, to two components of the female sex pheromone blend, (9Z,11E-tetradecadienyl acetate) and(9Z,12E-tetradecadienyl acetate), released from two separate dispensers at various distances (0-5 cm) from each other. The main pheromone component, 9Z-11E-14:OAc was tested at 1 and 10 ng in combination with the minor component 9Z-12E-14:OAc, at 1 % of the main\ncomponent. The low dose always showed a lower behavioural response than the high dose at the same separation distances (0-5 cm). When low doses were used, the response was higher at 0 and 3 cm separation than other separations whereas when high doses were used there was not much difference in response at 0, 2, and 3 cm separations. A Photo Ionization Detector(PID) was used to investigate plume width and overlap. The PID showed that 5 cm separation\nof odour sources was enough to totally separate the odour plumes from each other, whereas at 3 cm separation, plumes partially overlapped. By comparing the behavioural results with PID data it is concluded that insects are much more sensitive than the PID, since they responded at\ndistances where the PID showed zero ppb. Male insects may respond well to doses that are 20 times lower than one female equivalent. A field experiment for S. litura was done in Pakistan on cotton crop by spacing sex pheromone components. Pheromone components were spaced\nhorizontally at 0, 3, 5 and 15 cm on plastic moth pheromone traps. The high dose attracted more males than the medium and low dose. Males were highly attracted at 0 cm separation\nbut spacing decreased the catch and at 15 cm spacing there was no catch. The behavioural effect of separating ph. components was further studied on the spruce bark beetle, Ips typographus L., in the field. The attraction of I. typographus to traps baited with the two\naggregation pheromone components (cis-verbenol and 2-metyl-3-buten-2-ol) separated, was investigated in a Norway spruce clear-cut. The pheromone components were separated both vertically (0-112 cm) on extended Lindgren (19 funnel) traps and horizontally (0-80 cm) on modified windvane traps. I. typographus was strongly attracted when the two components were released from the same point but spacing between components decreased the trap catch. However, at 16 cm distance, in both the vertical and horizontal test, the trap catch was not much different from the positive control (0 cm separation). The effect of odour source spacing in the field on I. typographus was also studied with regards to repellent non-host volatiles (NHV). In this test, the aggregation pheromone were separated from a blend of\nrepellents (trans-conopthorin, 1,8-cineol, 3-octanol, 1-octen-3-ol, 1-hexanol and verbenone) using the same experimental design. NHV showed strong inhibitory effect up to 48 cm spacing but there was not much effect at 80 and 112 cm separations.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,428
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,247 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEpsilon Archive for Student Projects (University of Southampton)Même sujetPublic Health and NutritionTravaux en français237 207