Toxicity and Efficacy of Chlorantraniliprole on Pieris rapae (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) on Cabbage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toxicity of chlorantraniliprole was assayed against young (first and second instars) and older larvae (third and fourth instars) of cabbage Pieris rapae (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) on cabbage (Brassicae oleracea), and persistence of field–aged leaf residue of chlorantraniliprole was assayed with 5-old-day larvae of P. rapae on cabbage. Efficacies of chlorantraniliprole and other newer insecticides to P. rapae were tested under field conditions for two seasons in Hubei province in China. The LC50 value of chlorantraniliprole for early and later P. rapae larvae were 7.92 and 11.34 mg/L by contact toxicity, respectively. The LC50 value of chlorantraniliprole for early and later P. rapae larvae were 0.95 and 4.32 mg/L through ingestion, respectively. The toxicity of field-aged leaf residues of chlorantraniliprole (0-, 3-, 5-, 7-, 10-, 14-, 21-, 25-, and 28-day-old residues) declined gradually under the field conditions. Almost all larvae died on day 5 after feeding on the leaves with 0-21-day residue, and the mortalities were as high as 83.3% and 72.5% for the 21- and 25-day-old leaf residues. Chlorantraniliprole application suppressed P. rapae larvae below the economic threshold for 21-28 days. The field efficacy trials show that chlorantraniliprole at 52 mg a.i /L rate was effective against P. rapae larvae on cabbage, providing marketable cabbage with three applications per season. In addition, chlorantraniliprole was as effective as indoxacarb and spinosad and significantly more effective than emamectin benzoate.
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".