MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185547641

Compatibility of Glyphosate with Galerucella calmariensis; a Biological Control Agent for Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)

2021· article· en· W2185547641 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cory Lindgren, T. Shane Gabor, Henry R. Murkin

Bibliographic record

VenueAquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiological Control of Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersManitoba Hydro
KeywordsGlyphosateBiologyBiological pest controlBotanyAgronomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By integrating Galerucella calmariensis with glyphosate there is potential to achieve both immediate and sustained control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). The objective of this study was to determine the compatibility of glyphosate on the oviposition and survival of adult G. Calmariensis and on the ability of G. calmariensis third instar larvae to pupate to teneral adults. Our results revealed glyphosate (formulated as Roundup) at a concentration of 2% (2.43L/acre) and 4% solution (4.86 L/acre) had no impact on the ability of G. calmariensis third instar larvae to pupate to new generation adults. To examine the effect of a 2% solution of glyphosate on adult G. calmariensis oviposition and survival, adults were randomly divided between a direct contact group (adults sprayed directly), an indirect contact group (host plants with adults were sprayed), and a control group. Our results revealed that glyphosate does not impact G. calmariensis oviposition or adult survival. The results of this study indicate that G. calmariensis is compatible with glyphosate indicating that further field studies examining integrated control strategies for purple loosestrife are warranted.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)Same topicBiological Control of Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207