MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173162897 · doi:10.1093/jee/98.5.1648

Effect of Kaolin on Fitness and Behavior of Choristoneura rosaceana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) Larvae

2005· article· en· W2173162897 on OpenAlexafffund
Tara E. Sackett, Christopher M. Buddle, Charles Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Entomology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMcGill University
FundersNational Science CouncilAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsTortricidaeBiologyInstarLarvaLepidoptera genitaliaPupaMalusHorticultureAnimal scienceBotanyToxicology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanisms by which kaolin, a clay particle film formulation, affects the fitness and behavior of larvae of obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris), were investigated. Feeding experiments tested kaolin as a physical barrier versus a physiological toxin for larvae that consumed kaolin applied either to apple (Malus spp.) leaves or mixed in artificial diet. Behavioral experiments tested the effects of kaolin applied to apple leaves on neonate dispersal and leaf rolling by third and fourth instars. When larvae fed on apple leaves sprayed with kaolin, mortality and time to pupation of larvae increased significantly, whereas pupal mass significantly decreased. When larvae consumed kaolin mixed into an artificial diet, however, the effects on mortality, pupation time, and pupal mass were negligible. There may be minor physiological effects from consumption because male time to pupation was delayed for larvae fed diets containing the highest concentration of kaolin. In behavioral experiments, neonate larvae dispersed more quickly off plants covered with kaolin than control plants, and kaolin delayed the construction of leaf shelters by third and fourth instars. We showed that the effects of kaolin on C. rosaceana larvae are primarily physical, causing changes in dispersal and rolling behaviors and as a physical barrier to feeding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Economic EntomologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207