Evaluation of Application Methods for the Chemical Control of Striped Cucumber Beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Attacking Seedling Cucurbits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bioassays of treated field-aged leaves were conducted in 1998 and 1999 to determine the efficacy of various chemicals for control of striped cucumber beetle (SCR), Acalymma vittatum. In 1998, imidacloprid (GAUCHO® 480F) as a seed treatment was evaluated on cucumber (Cucunus sativis), cv. Pioneer, and squash (Cucurbita maxima), cv. Mini Green Hubbard. Three rates, 1.0 mg, 5.0 mg and 10.0 mg a.i./seed were evaluated for squash and one rate, 1.0 mg a.i./seed, for cucumber. Cucumber seeds treated with GAUCHO at rates higher than 1.0 mg a.i./seed did not germinate in this trial. All treatments protected growing cucumber and squash seedlings from SCB feeding. In 1999, the study was expanded to include foliar, seed, and planting water treatments. A single foliar application of endosulfan (THIODAN® 4EC), azinphosmethyl (SNIPER® 50WP), cypermethrin (RIPCORD® 400 EC) or imidacloprid (ADMIRE® 240F) applied to both cucumber cv. Calypso and pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo), cv. Howden, did not adequately protect rapidly growing seedlings from SCB. GAUCHO® 480F applied to cucumber, cv. Calypso, as a seed treatment at 0.75 mg and 1.0 nig a.i./seed effectively protected seedlings. Imidacloprid (ADMIRE® 240F) applied to squash transplants, cv. New England Blue Hubbard, in the starter solution at 15.0 and 25.0 ml/1000 plugs protected seedlings in the Held. Imidacloprid as both a seed and a planting water treatment provided systemic protection of developing cucurbits from adult SCB.
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 | 0.001 | 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".