Use of historical temperature data for timing insecticide applications of the Nantucket pine tip moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae): evaluation of damage and volume increment efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effectiveness of optimal spray period intervals based on mean daily temperatures were evaluated as a spray‐timing tool to control high density populations of the Nantucket pine tip moth Rhyacionia frustrana (Comstock). Initial tree growth realized from first generation R . frustrana control was compared to that from conventional applications of one insecticide treatment scheduled for each of three annual generations. The optimal spray period intervals provided by were highly effective for controlling R . frustrana infestations. The control group averaged 47.0 ± 2.2% whole tree damage for all sites and generations as compared to 0.6 ± 0.2% for the treated group. Volume gains attributable to R . frustrana control averaged 16.9%, 46.4% and 98.6% for first generation control, and 46.6%, 72.7% and 146.3% for conventional applications of one insecticide treatment scheduled for each of three annual R . frustrana generations at Northampton, Halifax I and Halifax II, respectively. Growth returns increased as mean damage estimates increased for both treatments, suggesting that returns realized from a single, first generation application are likely to increase with population density.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".