Differences in the Relationship Between Sensory Adaptation of Antennae and Concentration of Aerial Pheromone in the Oriental Fruit Moth and Obliquebanded Leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae): Implications for the Role of Adaptation in Sex Pheromone–Mediated Mating Disruption of These Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The antennae of Grapholita molesta (Busck) are more susceptible to sex pheromone-induced sensory adaptation than the antennae of Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris). Adaptation is detectable in G. molesta at 1/1,000th the aerial concentration of pheromone (i.e., 5.0 x 10(-7) ng Z8-12:OAc/ml air) that is required to induce detectable adaptation in C. rosaceana (i.e., 5.0 x 10(-4) ng Z11-14:OAc/ml air). In addition, the predicted concentration of pheromone required to induce 50% adaptation in G. molesta (i.e., 1.2 x 10(-3) ng Z8-12:OAc/ml air) after 15 min of exposure is only one sixth the estimated aerial concentration required to induce the same level of adaptation in C. rosaceana (i.e., 7.5 x 10(-3) ng Z11-14:OAc/ml air) after 15 min of exposure. Sixteen percent and 28% adaptation of G. molesta antennae is predicted after 15 and 30 min of exposure to the equivalent of 1 ng Z8-12:OAc/m(3) air (i.e., 1 x 10(-6) ng Z8-12:OAc/ml air). The predicted level of adaptation in C. rosaceana antennae, however, is only 1.5 and 9.9% after 15 and 30 min of exposure, respectively, to the equivalent of 1 ng Z11-14:OAc/m(3) air (i.e., 1 x 10(-6) ng Z11-14:OAc/ml air). The approximately three-fold greater level of sensory adaptation in G. molesta antennae after 30 min of exposure to a pheromone concentration measured in pheromone-treated orchards (i.e., 1 ng/m(3)) may be one reason why this species is more readily controlled than C. rosaceana using mating disruption.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".