MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042487104 · doi:10.2478/jppr-2013-0008

Biology of Pieris Brassicae (Linn.) on Different Brassica Species in the Plains of Punjab

2013· article· en· W2042487104 on OpenAlexaff
G. S. Chahil, J. S. Kular

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Protection Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersPunjab Agricultural University
KeywordsBiologyBrassicaPieris brassicaeBrassica rapaHatchingPupaLarvaIncubation periodBrassica carinataBotanyHorticultureIncubationVeterinary medicineAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biology of Pieris brassicae reared on Brassica napus, B. juncea, B. rapa, and B. carinata was studied. Adult butterflies, collected in November from the plains of Punjab, India, were sexed, paired, and released onto the four Brassica spp. in a greenhouse. In a multigeneration study (Parental, F1, and F2), the effect of the four Brassica spp. on the egg laying, incubation period and hatching percentage was assessed in a greenhouse study. Hatched larvae were collected, reared on fresh leaves of respective Brassica spp, in laboratory conditions. Data collected on larval stadia, pre-pupal and pupal durations, adult longevity, and sex ratio were assessed to understand the effects of these four species. Of the four species, B. carinata, with a shorter incubation period, higher hatching percentage, and shorter developmental periods was most susceptible. In this study, B. rapa was the most resistant species and may be recommended for further breeding programs in order to reduce the economic damage caused by P. brassicae.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant Protection ResearchSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207