Synthetic Lymantriid Pheromones Attract Male Moths of Lymantria spp. (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) in Sumatra.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pheromone components previously identified in various lymantriid moths were field tested in a trapping experiment near Padang, West Sumatra, Indonesia. Each of ten experimental replicates, consisting of four sticky traps, were deployed in complete randomized block and baited with one of four synthetic pheromone lures. Most interesting results include: (1) significant captures of male Lymantria brunneiplaga in traps baited with (+)- and (-)-xylinalure [(7R,8S)- and (7S,8R)-cis-7,8 epoxy-2-methyleicosane]; and (2) capture of male Lymantria subrosea singapura in traps baited with (+)-disparlure [(7R,8S)-cis-7,8-epoxy-2-methyloctadecane], (+)-monachalure [(7R,8S)-cis-7,8-epoxy-octadecane] and 2-methyl-Z7-octadecene. These results will allow an improve pheromone-based monitoring of L. brunneiplaga and L. subrosea singapura, respectively. Future studies should attempt to obtain virgin female moths of respective species for thorough laboratory analyses and field testing of candidate pheromone components. Males of L.beatrix (2) and Lymantria narindra (1) also responded to (+)-disparlure baited traps.
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".