MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077754701 · doi:10.1002/ps.938

The contact toxicity of indoxacarb and five other insecticides to <i>Orius insidiosus</i> (Hemiptera: Anthocoridae) and <i>Aphidius colemani</i> (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), beneficials used in the greenhouse industry

2004· article· en· W2077754701 on OpenAlexaff
N. J. Bostanian, M. Akalach

Bibliographic record

VenuePest Management Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersBayer CropScience
KeywordsIndoxacarbBiologyAbamectinBraconidaeToxicologyAnthocoridaeDimethoateHemipteraHymenopteraBotanyPesticideAgronomyParasitoidPredationEcologyPredator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The contact toxicity of indoxacarb, abamectin, endosulfan, insecticide soap, S-kinoprene and dimethoate to Orius insidiosus (Say) and Aphidius colemani Viereck were studied in the laboratory. These beneficials are often used in the greenhouses to manage various insect pests. Indoxacarb is slow acting and therefore, to estimate lethal dosages, observations should be continued for several days until data stabilize. Seven days after treatment, the LC50 was 0.119 g AI litre(-1) for O insidiosus adults and 0.019 g AI litre(-1) for A colemani. At that time, the recommended field concentration was 0.479 times the LC50 for O insidiosus adults and three times the LC50 for A colemani. In contrast, indoxacarb had no adverse effect on the reproductive capacity of wasps surviving a treatment or the developing wasps in the aphid mummy. Among the other insecticides S-kinoprene was the most innocuous while dimethoate was the most toxic to the two beneficials. The other insecticides had overlapping toxicities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations32
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePest Management ScienceSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207