Temperature, irradiation and delivery as factors affecting spring-time flight activity and recapture of mass-reared male codling moths released by the Okanagan-Kootenay sterile insect programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory flight-tunnel and field mark-release-recapture experiments were conducted to compare pheromone response, flight activity and recapture of wild codling moths, Cydia pomonella (L.), with codling moths mass-reared by the Okanagan-Kootenay Sterile Insect Release Programme. These experiments were designed to identify factors that may contribute to poor pheromone trap catches of sterile moths in the spring. Irradiation (250 Gy) had no influence on catches of n1ass-reared moths in pheromone traps at spring (16°C) or summer temperatures (25°C) in flight-tunnel assays. In field experiments however, recapture of n1ass-reared and wild moths in pheromone traps was significantly reduced after irradiation, suggesting effects of irradiation were modified by additional factors acting in the field. Catches of mass-reared moths in flight-t1mnel assays showed a nonlinear increase with increasing temperature. There was no evidence that n1ass- reared moths were less responsive to pheromone at low temperatures than wild moths. Based on x-intercepts of linear regressions of percent catch vs. temperature (15 - 25°C), flight-temperature thresholds for mass-reared (14.7°C) and wild moths (15.4°C) were similar in flight-tunnel assays. Irradiated moths carried for 4 h on all-terrain vehicles used for delivering sterile moths were less responsive to pheromone lures in subsequent flight-tunnel assays than moths that spent no time on these vehicles, but only when flown at spring-like temperatures (16°C). In field tests, moths released on the ground were caught significantly less often than moths released within the tree canopy and negative effects of ground release appeared greater when made in spring compared with autumn.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".