Exposure to Guava Affects Citrus Olfactory Cues and Attractiveness to<i>Diaphorina citri</i>(Hemiptera: Psyllidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intercropping can reduce agricultural pest incidence, and represents an important sustainable alternative to conventional pest control methods. Understanding the ecological mechanisms for intercropping could help optimize its use, particularly in tropical systems which present a large number of intercropping possibilities. Citrus is threatened worldwide by greening disease (huanglongbing, HLB) vectored by the Asian citrus psyllid, Diaphorina citri Kuwayama (Hemiptera: Psyllidae). Control of HLB and citrus psyllid can be partially achieved through intercropping with guava, Psidium guajava L., but the mechanisms remain unclear. We tested the hypothesis that guava olfactory cues affect psyllid behavior by altering the attractiveness of citrus through plant-plant interactions. In choice and no-choice cage experiments, psyllid settlement was reduced on citrus shoots that had been exposed to guava shoot odors for at least 2 h. In Y-tube olfactometer experiments, psyllids oriented to odors of unexposed, compared with guava-exposed, citrus shoots. These behavioral results indicate that a mechanism for the success of guava intercropping for sustainable, ecological disease management may be the indirect effect of guava on citrus attractiveness.
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".