How to Start with a Clean Crop: Biopesticide Dips Reduce Populations of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) on Greenhouse Poinsettia Propagative Cuttings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Global movement of propagative plant material is a major pathway for introduction of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) into poinsettia greenhouses. Starting a poinsettia crop with high pest numbers disrupts otherwise successful biological control programs and widespread resistance of B. tabaci against pesticides is limiting growers' options to control this pest; (2) This study investigated the use of several biopesticides (mineral oil, insecticidal soap, Beauveria bassiana, Isaria fumosorosea, Steinernema feltiae) and combinations of these products as immersion treatments (cutting dips) to control B. tabaci on poinsettia cuttings. In addition, phytotoxicity risks of these treatments on poinsettia cuttings, and effects of treatment residues on mortality of commercial whitefly parasitoids (Eretmocerus eremicus and Encarsia formosa) were determined; (3) Mineral oil (0.1% v/v) and insecticidal soap (0.5%) + B. bassiana (1.25 g/L) were the most effective treatments; only 31% and 29%, respectively, of the treated B. tabaci survived on infested poinsettia cuttings and B. tabaci populations were lowest in these treatments after eight weeks. Phytotoxicity risks of these treatments were acceptable, and dip residues had little effect on survival of either parasitoid, and are considered highly compatible; (4) Use of poinsettia cutting dips will allow growers to knock-down B. tabaci populations to a point where they can be managed successfully thereafter with existing biocontrol strategies.
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.
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 it