Curative Control of<i>Scirtothrips dorsalis</i>(Thysanoptera: Thripidae) with Biological Insecticides, 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study was 1) to evaluate the efficacy of the selected entomopathogens against a new invasive thrips pest, chilli thrips (CT), Scirtothrips dorsalis (Hood), in pepper, and 2) to compare potential of entomopathogens with a chemical standard. The trial was conducted at Tropical Research and Education Center in Homestead, FL, to find an alternative to standard effective chemistries used in thrips control. The peppers were grown in Fafard 2 Mix (Canadian Formula; Conrad Fafard, Inc., Agawam, MA) from seed in seedling trays and transplanted in 1 gal plastic pot when seedling were 7-wk old (approximately). Plants were watered as needed (∼3 times a week) and fertilized once each week with 20N: 20P: 20K granular fertilizer. The greenhouse was maintained at 26 ± 3°C and 75–80% RH. The trial was setup as RCB design with 12 replicates where treated pots were placed at 1.5 by 1.5 ft spacing. Treatments were applied as curative measure using a small hand held sprayer delivering 65.5 ml m 2 at 211 kPa (30.6 psi). Treatments were evaluated by carefully checking five top leaves of each pepper plant by direct count sampling method using 30x hand-held lens. Data were subjected to square root transformation prior to conducting the analysis of variance and mean separation procedure. The data presented are the untransformed means. Means separations were performed using the Tukey’s HSD test at P < 0.05. CT population varied greatly; however, significant reduction in thrips number was observed in all the treatments compared to control. Overall Radiant and PFR-97 were the most effective in controlling CT population (larvae and adults) throughout the study period. Chemical standard Radiant showed consistent result in regulating of CT larvae and provided 98–99% reduction on all the sampling dates ( Table 1 ). Entompathogens, such as PFR-97 (68–79%) and Met-52 (55–69%), also provided significant suppression of CT larvae during the study period. Botanigard (47–60%) was found to be the least effective. While evaluating different treatments for CT adults, Radiant and PFR 97 provided significant suppression in adults count compared to untreated control on all the sampling dates except DAT 15 for PFR 97 ( Table 2 ). Botanigard did not provide any significant reduction in CT adults. None of the insecticide treatments caused any phytotoxic effects on pepper. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different ( P > 0.05, Tukey HSD test). Henderson–Tilton’s corrected percent mortality is presented in parentheses after each mean. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different ( P > 0.05, Tukey HSD test). Henderson–Tilton’s corrected percent mortality is presented in parentheses after each mean. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different ( P > 0.05, Tukey HSD test). Henderson–Tilton’s corrected percent mortality is presented in parentheses after each mean. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different ( P > 0.05, Tukey HSD test). Henderson–Tilton’s corrected percent mortality is presented in parentheses after each mean.
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".