MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2763766535 · doi:10.4172/2161-0983.1000199

Effect of Achillea millefolium Strips and Essential Oil on the European Apple Sawfly, Hoplocampa testudinea (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidea)

2017· article· en· W2763766535 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer De Almeida, Daniel Cormier, Éric Lucas

Bibliographic record

VenueEntomology Ornithology & Herpetology Current Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAchillea millefoliumSawflyHymenopteraBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The European apple sawfly Hoplocampa testudinea (Klug) (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae) is a pest in numerous apple orchards in eastern North America. In Quebec, Canada, the European apple sawfly can damage up to 14% of apples and growers use phosphate insecticide during the petal fall stage to control the pest. Since the insecticide is toxic for beneficial insects, we established flower strips of Achillea millefolium L. (Asterales: Asteraceae) to interfere with the oviposition of the insect as an alternative. Populations of European apple sawfly adults were significantly reduced in areas close to flower strips compared to unmanaged areas (natural groundcover). In order to understand the mechanism of the flower strip effect, we tested the repellent effect of A. millefolium essential oil on populations of H. testudinea. Twenty flowers per apple tree were sprayed during full bloom, the oviposition period of the pest. Sprayed and control flowers were then collected and dissected to note the presence of oviposition scars and eggs of the European apple sawfly. Significantly less scars and eggs were observed on sprayed flowers than on control flowers, which means that A. millefolium had a repellent effect on the insect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntomology Ornithology & Herpetology Current Research→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→