MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088480036 · doi:10.4039/ent134657-5

Field testing of synthetic attractants for male <i>Grapholita libertina</i> (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)

2002· article· en· W2088480036 on OpenAlexaffabout
N. Kirk Hillier, Peggy L. Dixon, W. D. Seabrook, David J. Larson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pheromone Research and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickMemorial University of NewfoundlandAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTortricidaeLepidoptera genitaliaEricaceaeSex pheromoneBotanyHorticultureBiologyPEST analysisChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In an effort to develop an efficient monitoring method for the lingonberry fruitworm, Grapholita libertina Heinrich, an economically important pest of lingonberries, Vaccinium vitis-idaea L. var. minus Lodd. (Ericaceae), in Newfoundland, various known sex attractants for other species of the genus Grapholita Treitschke were evaluated for their ability to attract G . libertina moths in field trials in eastern Newfoundland. The chemicals tested were ( E , E )-8,10-dodecadien-1-ol acetate ( EE 8,10-12:Ac), ( E )-8-dodecen-1-ol acetate ( E 8-12:Ac), ( Z )-8-dodecen-1-ol acetate ( Z 8-12:Ac), and ( Z )-8-dodecen-1-ol ( Z 8-12:OH). Field trials in 1996 showed highest attraction to E 8-12:Ac, with Z 8-12:Ac and Z 8-12:OH also being attractive. Trials in 1997 demonstrated that a blend of E 8-12:Ac, Z 8-12:Ac, and Z 8-12:OH at a ratio of 85:10:5, respectively, was attractive to G . libertina males. All chemicals captured significantly more moths than did controls and all moths examined were males indicating these chemicals may be constituents of the naturally occurring female sex pheromone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicInsect Pheromone Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207