Effect of Different Photo Periods on the Biological Parameters of Chrysoperla carnea under Laboratory Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many insects are known to give response in adaptive way for seasonal changes in day lengths. Photoperiod control’s many developmental responses and allows insects to survive periods of unfavorable environmental conditions. An experiment was conducted to study the effect of different photoperiod lengths on biological parameters of green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea. Four different photoperiod regimes were selected with varying lengths of light/dark hours (8/16, 10/14, 24/0 and 0/24) at a constant 26±2°C temperature with 70 % RH (relative humidity) in the laboratory. Photoperiod regimes affected the development of C. carnea from egg to adult. In complete darkness (L: 0 D: 24), minimum egg laying, hatching, larval survival and adult emergence were recorded. Incubation period for eggs, larval period and pupal duration were also significantly longer in complete darkness as compared to other treatments 8L: 16D and 10L: 14D. Whereas, the treatment with complete light hours (L: 24, D: 0) resulted in maximum egg laying hatching, larval survival and adult emergence. The incubation period for eggs, larval and pupal duration significantly shortened as compared to other treatments.Sex ratios skewed towards female when full light hours were provided for development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".