MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115825661 · doi:10.1603/ec13283

An Inexpensive Feeding Bioassay Technique for Stored-Product Insects

2014· article· en· W2115825661 on OpenAlex
Erin L. Clark, Rylee Isitt, Erika Plettner, Paul G. Fields, Dezene P.W. Huber

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Entomology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pest Control Strategies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsBiologyScannerRelative humidityBioassayPetri dishGravimetric analysisEcologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We used the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum Herbst (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae), to compare three feeding bioassay techniques using flour disks. The area (scanner or digital photographs) and mass (sensitive balance) of the same flour disks were measured daily for 1 or 2 wk to assess feeding by insects. The loss in mass and area over 4 h was measured, as some variation over time was noticed in the disks with no insects feeding on them. The gravimetric method correlated well with both measurements of the area for the disks held in a growth chamber: scanner (R2 = 0.96), digital photography (R2 = 0.96). There was also a high correlation (R2 = 0.86) between the disk weight and area scanned at normal lab conditions. There were differences in the percentage of the disks remaining over time depending on the temperature and whether they were weighed or scanned. Measuring the mass of the disks resulted in a relatively larger percent of disk remaining compared with the scanned area. Mass measurements required a sensitive balance, handling of the disks and the insects, and appeared slightly more sensitive to humidity and temperature changes over time. Scanning the disks requires flat bed scanner access but less handling of both insects and disks. Digital photographs could be taken quickly, requiring less equipment, although photographs had to be further processed to determine area Scanning or taking digital photographs of flour disk area was an effective technique for measuring insect feeding.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.259
Teacher spread0.237 · 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