Trophic interactions between three species of cereal aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) and spring wheat (Poaceae): implications for pest management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The susceptibilities of genetically diverse Canadian spring wheats, Triticum aestivum L. and Triticum durum Desf., to three aphid species, Rhopalosiphum padi (L.), Sitobion avenae (Fabricius), and Schizaphis graminum (Rondani), were investigated. Trophic interactions measured as changes in biomass of aphids and wheat plants were used to quantify levels of resistance, components of resistance, and impact of aphids on yield. Plants in field cages were infested with small numbers of aphids for 21 days at heading. These plants were usually more suitable for the development of S. avenae and S. graminum than of R. padi. Partial resistance, measured as seed production by infested plants as a proportion of that by a control, varied from 11% to 59% for different aphid species and wheat classes when all wheat plants were infested at the same stage. Cultivars within wheat classes responded similarly to each of the aphid species. None of the wheat cultivars showed agriculturally effective levels of antibiosis. The specific impact of each aphid species and wheat class varied from 5 to 15 mg of plant biomass lost for each milligram of biomass gained by the aphids. Canadian Western Red Spring wheat had a lower specific impact and therefore was more tolerant to aphids than the other two classes, but not tolerant enough to avoid economic damage at the aphid densities observed. Plants did not compensate for feeding damage after aphid feeding ceased, based on the higher specific impacts observed for mature plants than for plants that were heading. The interactions between aphids and plants show that current economic thresholds probably underestimate the damage caused by cereal aphids to Canadian spring wheat.
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 | 0.001 | 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".