Population Density of Foliage Insect Pest on Jujube, Ziziphus mauritiana Lam. Ecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jujube, Ziziphus mauritiana L. is the King of arid zone fruits, due to its adaptations to tolerate the biotic and abiotic stresses. However, the occurrence of insect pest is the major threat to reduce the quality and quantity of fruits. The current studies are the first comprehensive evidence on the population density of foliage insect pests evaluated on two different varieties, Golden Gola (susceptible) and White Kherol (resistance) at farmer’s field Tando Qaiser, District Hyderabad during 2007 and 2008. A total of 13 different insect pests which were categorized as major (Ancylis sativa, Euproctis fraterna and Adoretus pallens), minor (Scirtothrips dorsalis, Amrasca biguttula biguttula, Myllocerus discolor, Achaea janata, Agrotis biconica and Aphis gossypii) and occasional (Oxycareous hyalinipennis, Dichromorpha viridis, Tarucus balkanicus and Orgyia postica) based on overall population of two years. The mean population percentage of insect pests indicates the highest percentage for E. fraterna followed by A. pallens, A. biguttula biguttula, M. discolor and S. dorsalis on White Kherol, whereas, Golden Gola was severely infested and showed maximum percentage with A. sativa followed by E. fraterna, S. dorsalis, A. pallens and A. biguttula biguttula. It is concluded that A. sativa, E. fraterna and A. pallens are serious insect pests of jujube. Pest monitoring with direct count and light trap can help to determine the ETL that is most important for the management of various insect pests including these major and minor pest. The present study will hopefully be helpful for management of foliage insect pests of jujube..
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 | 0.001 | 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".