The use of an alternative food source (red clover) as a means of reducing slug pest damage to winter wheat: towards field implementation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slugs are major pests of many crops in the UK, including winter wheat, yet current methods of control are often unreliable. The aim of this study was to investigate three issues key to the successful field implementation of a control strategy that uses red clover as an alternative food source to reduce the amount of damage caused to winter wheat by the field slug, Deroceras reticulatum (Müller). A series of three experiments was designed to assess this aim. Firstly, under laboratory conditions, red clover was consumed in greater quantities than wheat, even when wheat was presented as a novel food. Secondly, red clover had no significant effects on the emergence and early growth of wheat in a polytunnel experiment. Both these results are crucial to the successful implementation of a strategy that uses red clover as an alternative food source. Lastly, the results of a field experiment were consistent with the results of the polytunnel experiment, in that red clover did not significantly affect wheat emergence. However, plots in which red clover was left to grow until the time of wheat harvest resulted in significantly lower (43%) wheat yields than plots without red clover. These results suggest that red clover must be removed from the field after the wheat has passed its vulnerable seedling stage. Recommendations for the potential use of red clover as an alternative food source for reducing damage to winter wheat in field conditions are discussed and opportunities for further work are suggested.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".