Effect of certain monounsaturated dodecene and tetradecene acetates and alcohols on electroantennogram response and pheromone-mediated trap catch of the obliquebanded leafroller
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effect of certain monounsaturated dodecene and tetradecene acetates and alcohols on electroantennogram (EAG) response and pheromone-mediated trap catch was examined in male obliquebanded leafroller moths, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). The stimulation of antennae with 0.1 ng of ( Z )-11-tetradecenyl acetate ( Z 11-14:Ac), the major pheromone compound of this species, elicited an EAG response. The use of 1 ng of ( Z )-9-tetradecenyl acetate ( Z 9-14:Ac) or ( E )-9-tetradecenyl acetate ( E 9-14:Ac) or 10 ng of ( Z )-9-dodecenyl acetate ( Z 9-12:Ac) or ( E )-9-dodecenyl acetate ( E 9-12:Ac) was required to elicit a response. One hundred nanograms of ( E )-9-tetradecenol ( E 9-14:OH) were required to elicit a response from antennae. The stimulation of antennae with up to 100 ng of ( Z )-9-tetradecenol ( Z 9-14:OH) did not elicit a response. The addition of 0.1 mg of Z 9-12:Ac to 1 mg of synthetic C. rosaceana pheromone consisting of a 100:2:1.5:1 blend of Z 11-14:Ac, ( E )-11-tetradecenyl acetate, ( Z )-11-tetradecenol, and ( Z )-11-tetradecenal reduced the capture of moths in pheromone-baited traps by more than 72%. Trap catch was reduced by more than 90% by the addition of 0.01 mg of Z 9-14:Ac or E 9-14:Ac to 1 mg of C. rosaceana pheromone. There was no detectable reduction in trap catch when 1 mg of E 9-12:Ac, Z 9-14:OH, or E 9-14:OH was added to 1 mg of C. rosaceana pheromone. There was a greater than 95% reduction in trap catch when sources of Z 9- or E 9-12:Ac were mounted at the entrances to traps, 10 cm from the pheromone source. Trap catch was not affected by placing sources of Z 9- or E 9-14:Ac at trap entrances. Four 1 or 10 mg sources of E 9-14:Ac placed 1 m from a trap did not affect the number of male C. rosaceana captured. The study demonstrates that although a compound may have profound attraction inhibiting activity when mixed directly with C. rosaceana pheromone, this activity may be lost if the inhibitor is emitted a short distance from the pheromone. The study also demonstrates that a potent attraction inhibitor such as E 9-14:Ac does not repel C. rosaceana males and must be present along with pheromone to affect the behavior of this 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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".