Larviciding potency of water and ethanol extracts of <i>Phytolacca dodecandra</i> (L’ Herit) on <i>Anopheles gambiae</i> (Diptera: Culicidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Plant extracts are an attractive target for search of effective malaria vector control agents. The reason for this is that they present a cost effective, target specific and bio-degradable insecticides. The other reason is that they posses varied phytochemical contents that vectors are unlikely to develop resistance to very soon. In this study, we report on effectiveness of ethanol and water extracts of Phytolacca dodecandra (L’ Herit) against Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae) larvae. Methods: Crude ethanol and water extracts of leaves (shoot and midsection) and mature green fruits of P. dodecandra were scrutinized for larvicidal activity against 1 st to 4 th instar larvae of An. gambiae . Larvicidal bioassays were conducted and effectiveness evaluated using the >80% as per the WHO methods and threshold respectively. ANOVA analyses were performed for statistical justifications of the larvicidal property with P considered significant at p 80%. We recommend that additional refinement and tests need to be done before commercial exploitation as a malaria vector larvicide.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".