Oviposition Preferences of Bertha Armyworm<i>Mamestra configurata</i>Walker (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on Different Crucifer Cultivars and Growth Stages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bertha armyworm, Mamestra configurata Walker, oviposition preferences were examined using choice and no-choice experiments with intact cruciferous plants. Previous larval feeding experiments had indicated that some Brassica juncea L., Sinapis alba L., and B. carinata L. lines were relatively resistant to bertha armyworm feeding. To examine oviposition preferences, a representative cultivar from each species was compared with the Brassica napus L. cultivar AC Excel using plants at the full-flower stage in a choice experiment. The S. alba cultivar AC Pennant received the greatest number of eggs, despite being relatively resistant to larval feeding and offering the least amount of foliage among the plants tested. AC Excel was also compared with the B. juncea cultivar AC Vulcan in dual-choice and no-choice experiments. Bertha armyworm oviposition was substantially greater on AC Excel than on AC Vulcan in all experiments. The effects of crop phenology on oviposition were examined using three growth stages (preflower, full-flower, and pod) of B. napus AC Excel in choice tests. The number of egg masses and total number of eggs on each plant were used to measure oviposition. The full-flower plants were significantly more preferred for oviposition than plants in preflower or pod stages. Bertha armyworm laid most eggs in the upper portion of the crop canopy on the underside of leaves.
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".