MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104560304 · doi:10.1186/s40064-015-1221-2

Onion thrips (Thrips tabaci (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)) in cabbage on Prince Edward Island: observations on planting date and variety choice

2015· article· en· W2104560304 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Suzanne Blatt, Andrew D. Ryan, S.R. Adams, Joanne Driscoll

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringerPlus · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsHealth PEIAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsThripsThripidaeBiologyPEST analysisSowingBotanyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Onion thrips (Thrips tabaci Lindeman (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)) can be a pest in organic onion production on Prince Edward Island. This study was to examine the effect of planting time and variety on infestation levels and damage by onion thrips on cabbage (Brassicae oleracea capitala (L.)). A field site was planted with 2 main and 8 lesser varieties of cabbage over 4 planting dates. Some varieties were short season and harvested on July 31 with longer season varieties harvested on September 2. Blue sticky traps were used to capture thrips migrating into the field site from July 22-September 2. Traps were counted weekly and cabbage heads within the field site were visually surveyed for thrips. At harvest, heads were weighed and measured, thrips damage was assessed then the head was dissected and thrips counted on the first four layers of the head. Thrips exhibited a preference for Lennox over Bronco throughout the season although thrips populations were not high enough to effect economic damage in 2014. Planting date influenced cabbage head weight and size with later plantings yielding the largest heads. Use of planting date and variety to avoid thrips populations is discussed.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpringerPlusSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207