MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109405549 · doi:10.4039/n04-059

Potential of ethyl (2<i>E</i>,4<i>Z</i>)-2,4-decadienoate for monitoring activity of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in eastern North American apple orchards

2005· article· en· W2109405549 on OpenAlexafffundabout
R. M. Trimble, Ashraf M. El‐Sayed

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pheromone Research and Control
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgricultural Adaptation Council
KeywordsCodling mothKairomoneTortricidaeLepidoptera genitaliaPEARHorticultureBiologySex pheromonePheromonePheromone trapPEST analysisAttractionBotanyToxicologyEcologyPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Ontario apple orchards, the amount of synthetic codling moth (Cydia pomonella (L., 1758)) sex pheromone, E,E-8,10-dodecadien-1-ol (0.01–10.0 mg) used to bait traps significantly affected the mean total numbers of moths captured, whereas similar mean total numbers of moths were captured in traps baited with different amounts of pear-derived kairomone, ethyl (2E,4Z)-2,4-decadienoate (0.01–10.0 mg). The attractiveness of kairomone-baited traps was not increased by using greater amounts (100 and 1000 mg) of this compound. The attractiveness of the pheromone was not enhanced by the addition of kairomone. Similar patterns of adult male seasonal activity were observed when using pheromone-baited traps and kairomone-baited traps. The potential usefulness of kairomone-baited traps in the integrated management of C. pomonella in Ontario apple orchards 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations30
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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