MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1619247771

BLUEBERRY SPANWORM, ITAME ARGILLACEARIA (PACKARD) AND BUMBLE BEE, BOMBUS IMPATIENS (CRESSON) SUSCEPTIBILITY TO NEW BIORATIONAL INSECTICIDES

2011· article· en· W1619247771 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Krilen Ramanaidu

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeltamethrinBiologyToxicologyBiopesticidePyrethroidBeauveria bassianaPesticideBiological pest controlBotanyAgronomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biological and cultural control tactics are available for many agricultural pests but insecticides still play an important role in the rapid reduction of pest incidence when damage reaches economic levels. Laboratory and field toxicities of the reduced-risk products spinetoram and flubendiamide to Itame argillacearia (blueberry spanworm) was compared to deltamethrin, a conventional synthetic pyrethroid insecticide. In laboratory experiments, I. argillacearia larvae were highly susceptible to spinetoram and flubendiamide, and efficacy in the field was comparable to that of deltamethrin. Lethal and sublethal effects of the biopesticide formulations of Beauveria bassiana and Bacillus subtilis, and spirotetramat, a new tetramic acid insecticide, to bumble bees, Bombus impatiens, were also assessed. When ingested, field rates of spirotetramat caused high mortality after a week, and B. subtilis significantly reduced drone production. Field rates of spirotetramat, when applied topically, reduced drone production, but drone production varied following topical treatments of either biopesticide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.150 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207