MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095201716 · doi:10.4039/ent133105-1

<i>Beauveria bassiana</i> transmission in western corn rootworm (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)

2001· article· en· W2095201716 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara Mulock, L. D. Chandler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWestern corn rootwormBeauveria bassianaBiologyEpizooticEntomopathogenic fungusPEST analysisAgronomyBiological pest controlHost (biology)BassianaFungusBotanyEcologyOutbreakVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key stage in the development of an insect epizootic, either natural or induced, is the transmission of a pathogen from an infected to an uninfected host (Andreadis 1987). The establishment of secondary infections can augment long-term control by increasing the amount of inoculum present within the environment (Thomas et al. 1995). The ease of disease transmission from an infected to a healthy host is an important consideration in evaluating the potential of an entomopathogen as a microbial control agent. Currently, we are field-testing the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin (Moniliaceae), for the suppression of adult western corn rootworm, Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte, which is a key pest of corn, Zea mays L. (Gramineae), throughout the north-central United States and eastern Canada (Mulock and Chandler 2000). During our investigations we have often observed sporulating cadavers on corn plants, particularly within the leaf collars, following fungal application. In this study, we estimated the effect of the density of infected cadavers and the length of exposure time on disease transmission in adult western corn rootworm.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207