Compatibility of codling moths <i>Cydia pomonella</i> (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) from South Africa with codling moths shipped from Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The sterile insect technique (SIT) has been successfully applied against codling moth Cydia pomonella (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera; Tortricidae) in British Columbia since 1992 where the mass‐rearing facility produces between 15 and 16 million moths per week. Due to the seasonality of this pest, the facility is only fully utilized for part of the year. The time and expense of implementing SIT against codling moth in South Africa may be substantially reduced if moths from Canada were sexually compatible with those from South Africa. In addition, because the pome fruit‐growing season in both countries is opposite, the programme in Canada might benefit by maintaining moth production year‐round and selling moths to South Africa. Semi‐field studies in small cages and release‐recapture studies were conducted in an unsprayed apple orchard in South Africa to assess mating compatibility of laboratory‐reared codling moth from Canada and wild codling moths from South Africa. The results suggest that Canadian codling moth males were equally attracted to calling Canadian and South African females despite the fact that Canadian moths had been transported (from Canada to South Africa) for 48 h as both pupae and adults. The data also suggest that at lower field temperatures Canadian moths were more active than South African moths. Results from the release‐recapture field trials indicated that Canadian and South African males were equally attracted to Canadian and South African females. These results suggest that codling moths from Canada and South Africa are fully compatible and indicate that Canadian moths can be used for SIT studies in South Africa. As these studies were conducted with moths from two very different climatic and time zones, it is proposed that populations of codling moth in other pome fruit production areas may also be compatible with the Canadian moths.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".