Effect of European Chafer Larvae (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) on Winter Wheat and Role of Neonicotinoid Seed Treatments in Their Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A critical density of four third-instar larvae per 900 cm2 for European chafer, Rhizotrogus (Amphimallon) majalis (Razoumowsky), in winter wheat, Triticum aestivum L., was derived from small-plot greenhouse and field experiments conducted under favorable crop growing conditions at several Ontario and Michigan locations from 2001-2003. On average, plant weight was decreased by 14% and plant stand by 11% between zero and four larvae per 900 cm2. In a commercial field under moisture stress, a yield loss of 35% occurred at a density of two third-instars per 900 cm2. In short-term greenhouse experiments, density-dependent mortality was evident, whereas low larval recovery in field experiments indicates a high level of overwintering mortality, regardless of larval density. Winter wheat seed treatments of neonicotinoid insecticides, clothianidin, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam provided protection from damage by larvae, but the level of protection was inconsistent between greenhouse and field small plots, and there was no apparent difference in protection amongst active ingredients or between application rates. There was little evidence of larval mortality owing to seed treatment, which supports the suggestion that neonicotinoid insecticides protect seedlings from loss by a nonlethal mechanism. Overall, we estimate that a low rate of neonicotinoid insecticide used at larval densities just less than the critical density will mitigate winter wheat losses by 85%.
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".