Assessing the impact of Cry1Ab-expressing corn pollen on monarch butterfly larvae in field studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survival and growth of monarch larvae, Danaus plexippus (L.), after exposure to either Cry1Ab-expressing pollen from three Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn (Zea mays L.) events differing in toxin expression or to the insecticide, lambda-cyhalothrin, were examined in field studies. First instars exposed to low doses ( approximately 22 grains per cm(2)) of event-176 pollen gained 18% less weight than those exposed to Bt11 or Mon810 pollen after a 5-day exposure period. Larvae exposed to 67 pollen grains per cm(2) on milkweed leaves from within an event-176 field exhibited 60% lower survivorship and 42% less weight gain compared with those exposed to leaves from outside the field. In contrast, Bt11 pollen had no effect on growth to adulthood or survival of first or third instars exposed for 5 days to approximately 55 and 97 pollen grains per cm(2), respectively. Similarly, no differences in larval survivorship were observed after a 4-day exposure period to leaves with 504-586 (within fields) or 18-22 (outside the field) pollen grains per cm(2) collected from Bt11 and non-Bt sweet-corn fields. However, survivorship and weight gain were drastically reduced in non-Bt fields treated with lambda-cyhalothrin. The effects of Bt11 and Mon810 pollen on the survivorship of larvae feeding 14 to 22 days on milkweeds in fields were negligible. Further studies should examine the lifetime and reproductive impact of Bt11 and Mon810 pollen on monarchs after long-term exposure to naturally deposited pollen.
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) | 0.001 | 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".