PCR-based methods for identification of two<i>Eteobalea</i>species (Lepidoptera: Cosmopterigidae) used as biocontrol agents of weedy<i>Linaria</i>species (Scrophulariaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two European species of the genusEteobaleaHodges are being tested as classical biological control agents for toadflax (Linariaspp.) in Canada. Permits for the release of these species apply only to an Italian population ofE. serratellaTreitschke and a Serbian population ofE. intermediellaRiedl. When these species are imported as larvae or pupae from an area where they are sympatric, such as around Rome, they must later be separated in the laboratory. This step is essential to establish a pure laboratory colony of the correct species, both to increase the rate of breeding success and to comply with conditions of the importation permit. Although the male and female genitalia and the egg chorion have good diagnostic characters, these characters are not useful for identifying immature stages or newly emerged adults before mating and oviposition. This problem has hampered the establishment of rearing colonies of these two species in Canada. We describe the development and application of four polymerase chain reaction – restriction fragment length polymorphism assays that have been used to distinguish between these two species. If and when either of these species becomes established in the field, the tests presented here should also prove useful for monitoring populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".