MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2252433840 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b03753

Quantifying Neonicotinoid Insecticide Residues Escaping during Maize Planting with Vacuum Planters

2015· article· en· W2252433840 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yingen Xue, Victor Limay‐Rios, Jocelyn L Smith, Tracey Baute, Luis Gabriel Forero, A. W. Schaafsma

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsNeonicotinoidSowingAtrazineImidaclopridAgronomySoil waterPesticideChemistryEnvironmental scienceBiologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neonicotinoid residues escaping in vacuum-planter exhaust during maize planting were measured in 25 fields in southwestern Ontario in 2013-2014 using filter bags to collect planter exhaust dust and horizontal and vertical sticky traps to collect planter operation-generated dust. Atrazine residues were used to differentiate between neonicotinoid residues originating from seed or from disturbed soil. Recovery rates of seed-applied neonicotinoids in exhaust were 0.014 and 0.365% in 2013 and 2014, respectively, calculated on the basis of neonicotinoid concentrations in preplant soil and seed application rates. Neonicotinoid exhaust emission rates were 0.0036 and 0.1104 g/ha for 2013 and 2014, respectively, with 99.9472 and 99.7820% originating from treated seed in 2013 and 2014, respectively, calculated on the basis of the atrazine marker. Rates of recovery of seed-applied neonicotinoid residues by exhaust filter bags were 0.015 and 0.437% for 2013 and 2014, respectively. Neonicotinoid residues captured on horizontal and vertical traps were 1.10 ng/cm2 (0.1104 g/ha) and 1.45 ng/cm2 (0.0029 g/ha), respectively, with 92.31 and 93.03% originating from treated seed, respectively, representing 0.3896% of the original active ingredient applied to the seed planted. Exposure to pollinators can be best reduced by strategies to keep active ingredient on the seed, below the soil surface, and in the field where applied.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations32
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207