MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152791375 · doi:10.1673/031.009.5801

Preliminary Results on Evaluation of Chickpea,<i>Cicer arietinum</i>, Genotypes for Resistance to the Pulse Beetle,<i>Callosobruchus maculatus</i>

2009· article· en· W2152791375 on OpenAlexfundno aff
F. Erle, F. O. Ceylan, Tuğba Erdemir, Cengiz Toker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Insect Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural pest management studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de CórdobaAkdeniz ÜniversitesiAlberta Agricultural Research Institute
KeywordsCallosobruchus maculatusBiologyResistance (ecology)Callosobruchus chinensisGenotypePEST analysisHorticulturePulse (music)AgronomyBotanyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The chickpea, Cicer arietinum L. (Fabales: Fabaceae), seeds are vulnerable, both in the field and in storage, to attack by seed-beetles. Beetles of the genus Callosobruchus are major storage pests of chickpea crops and cause considerable economic losses. In the present study, a total of 11 chickpea genotypes including five 'kabuli' (Mexican white, Diyar, CA 2969, ILC 8617 and ACC 245) and six 'desi' chickpeas (ICC 1069, ICC 12422, ICC 14336, ICC 4957, ICC 4969 and ICC 7509) were evaluated for resistance to the pulse beetle Callosobruchus maculatus F. (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Resistance was evaluated by measuring percent damage to seeds. Damage to seeds by C. maculatus was manifested by the round exit holes with the 'flap' of seed coat made by emerging adults. Of the 11 genotypes tested, only one (ICC 4969) exhibited a complete resistance to C. maculatus in both free-choice and no-choice tests; no seed damage was found over the test period. In general, the 'desi' chickpeas were more resistant to C. maculatus than the 'kabuli' chickpeas. Among the tested chickpea genotypes, only ICC 4969 can be used as a source of C. maculatus resistance in breeding programmes that could then be grown in organic cultivation free from pesticides.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Insect ScienceSame topicAgricultural pest management studiesFrench-language works237,207