Dialkoxybenzene and Dialkoxyallylbenzene Feeding and Oviposition Deterrents against the Cabbage Looper, Trichoplusia ni: Potential Insect Behavior Control Agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The antifeedant, oviposition deterrent, and toxic effects of individual dialkoxybenzene compounds/sets and of hydroxy- or alkoxy-substituted allylbenzenes, obtained through Claisen rearrangement of substituted allyloxybenzenes, were assessed against the cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni , in laboratory bioassays. Most of the compounds/sets strongly deterred larval feeding, with some exhibiting mild toxic and oviposition deterrent effects as well. Some of the compounds/sets were more active than the commercial insect repellent, DEET (N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide), as both feeding and oviposition deterrents against the cabbage looper. On the basis of the obtained oviposition data a general hypothesis was proposed regarding the oviposition sites: one binding mode with the alkyl and allyl groups on the same side of the benzene ring resulted in deterrence, the other with alkyl and allyl groups on opposite sides of the benzene ring resulted in stimulation. The results suggest some structure-activity relationships useful in improving the efficacy of the compounds and designing new, nontoxic insect control agents for agriculture.
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".