Identification of insecticidal constituents of the essential oils of<i>Dahlia pinnata</i>Cav. against<i>Sitophilus zeamais</i>and<i>Sitophilus oryzae</i>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research was to determine the chemical composition of the essential oils of Dahlia pinnata, their insecticidal activity against Sitophilus zeamais and Sitophilusoryzae and to isolate insecticidal constituents. Based on bioactivity-guided fractionation, active constituents were isolated and identified as D-limonene, 4-terpineol and α-terpineol. Essential oils and active compounds tested exhibited contact toxicity, with LD50 values ranging from 132.48 to 828.79 μg/cm(2) against S. zeamais and S. oryzae. Essential oils possessed fumigant toxicity against S. zeamais and S. oryzae with LC50 from 14.10 to 73.46 mg/L. d-Limonene (LC50 = 4.55 and 7.92 mg/L) showed stronger fumigant toxicity against target insects. 4-Terpineol (88 ± 8%) and d-limonene (87 ± 5%) showed the strongest repellency against S. zeamais and S. oryzae, respectively. The results indicate that essential oils and insecticidal constituents have potential for development into natural fumigants, insecticides or repellents for control of the stored-product insect pests.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it