Laboratory studies of the toxicity of spinosad and deltamethrin to <i>Phyllotreta cruciferae</i> (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Laboratory experiments were conducted to evaluate the contact and oral toxicity of commercial formulations of spinosad and deltamethrin to adults of the crucifer flea beetle, Phyllotreta cruciferae (Goeze). Method of exposure had a significant effect on flea beetle mortality and feeding damage to canola seedlings. Topical treatment of flea beetles with deltamethrin or different concentrations of spinosad resulted in significantly lower mortality and higher feeding damage than exposure to treated canola cotyledons. Results indicated that spinosad was more toxic by ingestion than by topical contact. Mortality from treated cotyledons was significantly higher with 60 ppm deltamethrin than with 80 or 120 ppm spinosad after 24 h exposure but not after 120 h exposure. Delayed mortality in the spinosad treatments did not result in high feeding damage; damage after 120 h was not significantly different in the spinosad and deltamethrin treatments. Low concentrations of spinosad (40 ppm) strongly inhibited feeding activity within 24 h after exposure. Mortality from spinosad was higher after beetles were exposed to treated cotyledons for 120 h than for 24 h. Mortality from spinosad, but not deltamethrin, was significantly higher at 25 °C than at 15 °C. An ionic surfactant, polyethylenimine, increased the toxicity of 40 ppm spinosad. Our study suggests that spinosad has potential for use as an insecticide against crucifer flea beetles on canola.
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) | 0.001 | 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".