Investigation of High Humidity Requirement for Infection of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) by Two Entomopathogenic Fungi, Beauveria bassiana and Lecanicillium muscarium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The suitable humidity condition for infecting whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius), with two commercial mycoinsectisides, BotaniGard ES (Beauveria bassiana formulation) and Mycotal (Lecanisillium muscarium formulation) was investigated. The second instar nymph of B. tabaci on a leaf disc was inoculated with 1/500 or 1/1,000 dilutions of BotaniGard ES or Mycotal, respectively, by a dipping method. Based on infection rates of the inoculated whiteflies, which were exposed to >99% RH for various periods and then transferred to 50% RH, the requisite high humidity period for 90% infection was estimated to be 47 and 82 h in BotaniGard ES and Mycotal, respectively. In a tomato greenhouse in autumn 2009 and 2010 in Ibaraki, humidity under tomato leaves was higher than the ambient humidity, whereas the period at >99% RH was about 14 h per day. When the inoculated whiteflies were reared under a fluctuating humidity cycle of 14-hour exposure to >99% RH and 10-hour exposure to 50% RH, the infection rate of these whiteflies increased significantly in comparison with that of the whiteflies reared at 50% RH following 14-hour exposure to >99% RH. This result reveals that the intermittent high humidity cycle enhances the fungal infection of B. tabaci.
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".