Impact of exclusion netting row covers on arthropod presence and crop damage to ‘Honeycrisp’ apple trees in North America: A five-year study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exclusion nets have been used successfully in France against codling moth Cydia pomonella (L.) since the early 2000s. Such a system has been adapted for North American conditions and was tested in an experimental apple orchard (‘Honeycrisp’) in southern Quebec, Canada from 2012 to 2016. Evaluation of insect and disease damage, as well as physical and physiological damage, was made in complete exclusion plots—in which the soil is also excluded—and in unnetted control plots. The exclusion system proved to be an effective protection device for the vast majority of key pests of apple fruit in most years. Damage from key insect pests such as the apple maggot Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh), the tarnished plant bug Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) and the codling moth was significantly lower in netted plots than in unnetted plots. However, obliquebanded leafroller Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) damage increased over the years to the point of being significantly more important in netted plots in 2015. Minimal or non-significant effects were observed on smaller, foliar pests, while highly significant protection effects were recorded for abiotic damage from frost and hail events that occurred during the study. Nets showed a significant protective effect on diseases such as apple scab Venturia inaequalis (Cooke) G. Wint., Gymnosporangium spp. rusts, and sooty blotch and flyspeck (SBFS) complex, when these were present in our plots.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".