Feeding preferences, growth, and development of <i>Mamestra configurata</i> (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on Brassicaceae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The growth (increase in body mass) and development (progression to specific instar) of the bertha armyworm, Mamestra configurata Walker, were examined using up to 14 plant lines from five species of brassicaceous plants. Varietal and breeding lines of Brassica napus L., B . juncea L., B . rapa L., B . carinata L., and Sinapis alba L. were selected on the basis of differing seed and foliar glucosinolate levels. No-choice feeding experiments were conducted with larvae isolated on leaf discs, individual leaves, or entire plants of each line. The no-choice tests showed that M . configurata weight gain and development varied significantly among host plants tested. Two B . juncea lines (AC Vulcan and H-Allyl) and the S . alba lines (AC Pennant and L-GS) were the poorest hosts in terms of larval weight gain, and the two B . juncea lines also significantly slowed development relative to the other lines tested. Mamestra configurata feeding preference, which was examined using a series of paired leaf disc choice tests, was also significantly different among the lines examined. Two B . juncea lines (AC Vulcan and H-Allyl) were significantly less preferred than all the other lines examined. The data extends previous work indicating that specific foliar glucosinolates, such as sinigrin, which is predominant in B . juncea , and sinalbin, which is abundant in S . alba , may provide brassicaceous crops with some protection from M . configurata . Thus, it may be possible to use foliar glucosinolate levels as predictors of M . configurata feeding damage in the development of breeding lines for the genus Brassica .
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".