Root Weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Immigration into Strawberry Plots Protected by Fence or Portable Trench Barriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical exclusion shows some potential as a novel root weevil control strategy, but barriers to root weevil immigration may also exclude beneficial insects, such as ground beetles. A field study was undertaken in 1997 to assess the impact of two physical barriers—portable plastic trenches and aluminum fences with Teflon tape—on root weevil and ground beetle immigration into plots of strawberry, Fragaria x ananassa (Duchesne). Barypeithes pellucidus (Boheman) and Nemocestes incomptus (Horn), each comprised 43% of the root weevils caught at the site. Most (86%) of the ground beetles caught in control plots were longer than 1 cm, the width of the gap in the portable trench top. Trenches excluded 75 and 63% of B. pellucidus and N. incomptus, respectively, without significantly reducing immigration of large (<1 cm) ground beetles. Fences excluded 65, 84, and 99% of B. pellucidus, N. incomptus, and large ground beetles, respectively. Adding diatomaceous earth to trenches did not increase their efficacy, and fences without Teflon tape excluded ground beetles but not root weevils. The reduction in the population of root weevils and other strawberry pests caused by the use of barriers reduced damage to strawberry plant leaves and increased strawberry plant survival relative to unprotected control plots. Advantages and disadvantages of these physical control tools are discussed with a view to creating superior tools for root weevil exclusion, compatible with an integrated pest management approach. Portable trenches may offer a means of selectively excluding root weevils but not ground beetles.
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".