MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bioactivities of Essential Oils from Basil and Sage To<i>Sitophilus Oryzae</i>L.

2006· article· en· W2116356931 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pest Control Strategies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsSitophilusBasilicumOcimumFecunditySalvia officinalisEssential oilBiologySAGERice weevilCallosobruchus maculatusToxicologyBotanyHorticultureFood scienceTraditional medicineOfficinalisPEST analysisMedicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biological activities of essential oils from Ocimum basilicum L. and Salvia officinalis L. against Sitophilus oryzae were investigated in the laboratory experiments. Contact toxicity (applied essential oils on filter papers), grain treatment for mortality and repellency assays, and also effect of oils on insect fecundity were obtained during four weeks. Only the most concentrated solutions of essential oils (2 %) of both plants caused the significant mortality, repellency and anti-reproductive effect. All grain-protective properties of essential oils were concentration- and time-dependent. Insecticidal effectiveness of applied oil's solutions on the grain surface was similar as on filter paper; repellency of the most concentrated oils was significant, but their effect in reduction the F1 progeny was the most striking.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.179 · 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