Effects of red versus white wheat bran on rate of growth and feeding of some stored-product beetles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The red pigment in the seed coat of hard red spring wheat is produced by phenolics. Most of the wheats grown in western Canada are hard red spring varieties; however cultivars with a whiter seed coat are being developed for their better milling and baking attributes. Because phenolics serve to protect some plants against insect attack, we compared the susceptibility of white and red spring wheat to attack by stored-product insects. Tenebrio molitor (Tenebrionidae) larvae reared on red wheat bran gained less weight than larvae reared on white wheat bran but this insect has a long developmental period and does not attack sound grain. Tribolium castaneum (Tenebrionidae) pupal weights were not affected by the type of wheat milled products on which the larvae fed. A feeding bioassay showed that red bran did not act as an antifeedant for T. molitor, T. castaneum, or Sitophilus oryzae (Curculionidae). However, it acted as a feeding stimulant for Rhyzopertha dominica (Bostrichidae), which is related to wood-boring insects. It is unlikely that white wheat in storage would be more prone to insect damage than red wheat. Key words: Bran, colour, wheat, phenolics, stored-product insects
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".