Green peach aphid, <i>Myzus persicae</i> (Hemiptera: Aphididae), reproduction during exposure to sublethal concentrations of imidacloprid and azadirachtin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resurgence of insect pests following insecticide applications is often attributed to natural enemy disturbance, but hormesis could be an alternative or additional mechanism. Green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Sulzer), is an important insect pest of many crops worldwide that may be exposed to sublethal insecticide concentrations over time. Here, the hypothesis that exposure to low concentrations of imidacloprid and azadirachtin can induce hormetic responses in M. persicae is tested in the laboratory. RESULTS: When insects were exposed to potato leaf discs dipped in sublethal concentrations of insecticide, almost all measured endpoints-adult longevity, F1 production, F1 survival and F2 production-were affected, and a statistically significant (P < 0.05) stimulatory response was recorded for F2 production following exposure to imidacloprid. No other measures for hormesis were statistically significant, but other trends of hormetic response were consistently observed. CONCLUSIONS: Given that variable distribution and degradation of insecticides in the field would result in a wide range of concentrations over time and space, these laboratory experiments suggest that exposure to sublethal concentrations of imidacloprid and azadirachtin could stimulate reproduction in M. persicae.
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".