MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029201136 · doi:10.7202/706035ar

État actuel de la lutte biologique contre les acariens phytophages par des acariens prédateurs

2005· article· fr· W2029201136 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michèle Roy

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytoprotection · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyForestryAcaricideAcariNatural enemiesPhytoseiidaeHumanitiesBotanyPredationEcologyGeographyPredatorPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Québec, la stratégie de lutte contre le tétranyque rouge du pommier ( Panonychus ulmi ) et le tétranyque à deux points ( Tetranychus urticae ) dans les vergers de pommier ( Malus pumila ) repose actuellement sur l'emploi d'acaricides coûteux. Par ailleurs, les consommateurs exigent de plus en plus des fruits exempts de pesticides. Dans ce contexte, l'utilisation de méthodes de lutte non chimiques suscite un grand intérêt auprès des pomiculteurs. Depuis plusieurs années, les efforts de recherche et les essais conduits aux États-Unis et en Europe ont donné un large essor à l'utilisation de souches d'acariens prédateurs résistants à certaines classes de pesticides. Au Québec, des expériences de lutte biologique avec l'acarien prédateur Amblyseius fallacis [Acarina: Phytoseiidae] ont été entreprises depuis quelques années. Cet article se propose d'exposer la problématique de la lutte contre les acariens nuisibles dans les vergers québécois ainsi que les perspectives d'avenir de l'utilisation de la lutte biologique contre ces ravageurs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytoprotectionSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207