Boron and Coumaphos Residues in Hive Materials Following Treatments for the Control of Aethina tumida Murray
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the search of alternatives for controlling Aethina tumida Murray, we recently proposed the BAA trap which uses boric acid and an attractant which mimics the process of fermentation caused by Kodamaea ohmeri in the hive. This yeast is excreted in the feces of A. tumida causing the fermentation of pollen and honey of infested hives and releasing compounds that function as aggregation pheromones to A. tumida. Since the boron is the toxic element in boric acid, the aim of this article is to assess the amount of boron residues in honey and beeswax from hives treated with the BAA trap. For this aim, the amount of bioaccumulated boron in products of untreated hives was first determined and then compared with the amount of boron of products from hives treated with the BAA trap in two distinct climatic and soil conditions. The study was conducted in the cities of Padilla, Tamaulipas, and Valladolid, Yucatan (Mexico) from August 2014 to March 2015. The quantity of boron in honey was significantly less in Yucatan than in Tamaulipas; this agrees with the boron deficiency among Luvisol and Leptosol soils found in Yucatan compared to the Vertisol soil found in Tamaulipas. In fact, the honey from Yucatan has lower boron levels than those reported in the literature. The BAA treatment was applied for four months, results show that the BAA trap does not have any residual effect in either honey or wax; i.e., there is no significant difference in boron content before and after treatment. On the other hand, the organophosphate pesticide coumaphos was found in 100% of wax samples and in 64% of honey samples collected from Yucatan. The concentration of coumaphos in honey ranges from 0.005 to 0.040 mg/kg, which are below Maximum Residue Limit (MRL) allowed in the European Union (0.1 mg/kg) but 7.14% of samples exceeded the MRL allowed in Canada (0.02 mg/kg).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".