MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1488172933 · doi:10.1071/ar02132

Do farming practices influence the incidence of Childers canegrubs, <i>Antitrogus</i> <i>parvulus</i> Britton (Coleoptera : Scarabaeidae)?

2003· article· en· W1488172933 on OpenAlex
P. G. Allsopp, Timothy W. A. Fischer, G. S. Bade, David J. Dall

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Agricultural Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEntomopathogenic Microorganisms in Pest Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationAustralian GovernmentMcGill University
KeywordsCropBiologyScarabaeidaeAgronomySowingTillageCrop residueCrop rotationToxicologyAgricultureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of farming practices on numbers of Childers canegrubs was determined in southern Queensland by a survey of 441 field–year combinations that related practices to the numbers of second- and third-instar larvae in those fields, and by a field experiment that tested combinations of insecticide application, cultivation practices, and crop-residue retention on numbers of larvae and associated entomopathogens. There were significant differences in levels of infestation among years, soil types, crop ages, cultivars grown, insecticide-use strategies, crop-replacement strategies, intensity and frequency of tillage during crop replacement, and irrigation strategies. In the field trial, numbers of third-instar larvae declined as the larvae aged, probably through infection by the fungus Metarhizium anisopliae and the protozoan Adelina sp. Application at planting of the controlled-release insecticide suSCon Blue had an immediate effect on the number of larvae carried over from the previous crop cycle and this effect continued into the second-ratoon crop. The insecticide application increased cane and sugar yields, particularly in the first-ratoon crop. More intensive pre-planting tillage initially reduced numbers of larvae, but the effect did not continue into the ratoon crops. Management of crop residues had no consistent effect on numbers of larvae, but cane yields were higher and sugar content lower in the second-ratoon crop when residues were retained, and led to higher sugar yields where suSCon Blue had been applied. In general, long breaks between successive sugarcane crops, coupled with intensive tillage in that break and application of controlled-release insecticide, will reduce subsequent populations of larvae. The alternative strategy of herbicide destruction of the previous crop, long fallow with minimum tillage, replanting without controlled-release insecticide, and prudent use of transient insecticides in heavily infested ratoon crops will also minimise numbers and may allow better survival of entomopathogens. These strategies have been integrated into management practices attractive to growers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it