Effect of Different Infestation Levels of Chilo Infuscatellus (Snellen) on Quantity and Quality Parameters of Sugarcane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population dynamics of sugarcane stem borer on commercial varieties of sugarcane were evaluated. The adults of Chilo infuscatellus (Snellen) emerged from over wintering larvae during fourth week of February. The population of adults of C. infuscatellus remained low in early vegetative growth stage of sugarcane crop. The number of moth/ trap increased gradually as the growth of the crop advanced and the maximum population of 37.4± 2.20 was recorded during August. When mean number of 18.98 moth/ trap were collected. The population of C. infuscatellus was declined after August and 28.6±2.42, 14.6 ± 1.74 moths were captured/ trap in month of September and October, respectively. The infestation of sugarcane stem borers was inversely proportional to the quantity and quality of sugarcane. Maximum cane weight of 13.5 ± 0.21 and 12.1± 0.05 kg were recorded in CPF-237 and Thatta-10 varieties at 0% infestation level, while minimum at 20% infestation (9.3±0.12 and 8.5 ±0.12 kg), respectively. Highest sugar recovery (11.0 ±0.08 and 10.2±0.11%) was observed at 0% infestation while lowest (9.3±0.12 and 8.5 ±0.12%) at 20% infestation in both the varieties.
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) | 0.001 | 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".