Comparative growth inhibitory and antifeedant effects of plant extracts and pure allelochemicals on four phytophagous insect species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Antifeedant and growth inhibitory effects of crude plant extracts ( Melia volkensii and Origanum vulgare ) and pure allelochemicals (digitoxin, cymarin, xanthotoxin, toosendanin, thymol and trans ‐anethole) were investigated in the cabbage looper ( Trichoplusia ni ), and in the armyworm ( Pseudaletia unipuncta ) using different bioassays. Antifeedant effects of M. volkensii , O. vulgare and thymol were investigated in larvae of the diamondback moth ( Plutella xylostella ), and of O. vulgare and thymol in the Mexican bean beetle ( Epilachna varivestis ), using leaf disc choice bioassays. M. volkensii was the most potent growth inhibitor for T. ni and P. unipuncta (dietary EC 50 = 7.6 and 12.5 p.p.m., respectively) of all the test substances. Cymarin was the second most potent growth inhibitor (EC 50 = 132.0 p.p.m.) for T. ni . The most effective feeding deterrents for third instar T. ni larvae were xanthotoxin and M. volkensii (DC 50 = 0.9 and 8.3 μ g/cm 2 , respectively). M. volkensii was also the most potent feeding deterrent for third instar P. unipuncta , P. xylostella and adult E. varivestis (DC 50 = 10.5, 20.7 and 2.3 μ g/cm 2 , respectively). Because of interspecific differences in response to feeding deterrents and the lack of a strong relationship between EC 50 and DC 50 values, we recommend testing a battery of bioassay species with candidate compounds and the use of more than one bioassay. Based on their growth inhibitory and feeding deterrent properties, some of these plant extracts and pure allelochemicals have potential for use as alternative crop protectants against a number of pest species.
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".