Effects of food nutritive quality and <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i> onfeeding behaviour, food utilization and larval growth of spruce budworm <i>Choristoneura fumiferana</i> (Clem.) when exposed as fourth‐ and sixth‐instar larvae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract 1 Feeding behaviours, and lethal and sublethal (growth, development and food utilization) effects of Foray 48B, a commercial formulation of Bacillus thuringiensis (kurstaki) , were investigated on fourth‐ and sixth‐instar spruce budworm larvae according to food nutritive quality. Nitrogen and soluble sugar content of artificial diets were modified to obtain three different qualities of food, simulating variations in nutritive quality of host tree. 2 Larval development times were longer for Bt ‐treated larvae and pupal weights were reduced for sixth‐instar larvae only. Bt ‐induced mortality levels were influenced by food quality. Ingested dose of Bt and feeding inhibition times were strongly affected by the Bt treatment, but food quality affected only fourth‐instar larvae. Except for food digestibility, nutritional indices were negatively affected by the Bt treatment and by the reduction in food quality. 3 Contrary to early treated larvae (fourth instar), larvae treated at the beginning of the sixth instar were not able to compensate for Bt injury and were consequently more affected by the Bt ‐treatment both in terms of lethal and sublethal effects. 4 Bt efficacy was not directly related to the ingested dose. 5 Increase in larval vulnerability to Bt was more likely a consequence of a general stress induced by a less suitable food than a direct interaction between Bt and food nitrogen or sugar compounds. 6 The application of Bt on late‐instar larvae could be a successful operational strategy at low population levels when field sprays target the insect instead of foliage protection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".