MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768654258 · doi:10.1111/eea.12620

Rye bread and synthetic bread odorants – effective trap bait and lure for German cockroaches

2017· article· en· W2768654258 on OpenAlexafffund
Joshua Cornelis Pol, Regine Gries, Gerhard Gries

Bibliographic record

VenueEntomologia Experimentalis et Applicata · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInsects and Parasite Interactions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsGerman cockroachBiologyCockroachAttractionFood scienceBioassayAttractivenessToxicologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bread‐in‐beer and bread‐in‐water are prevalent home recipe trap baits for attracting German cockroaches (GCRs), Blattella germanica (L.) (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae), which are significant urban pests. Our objectives were to (1) test the attractiveness of these baits, (2) study the underlying factors of GCR attraction, and (3) determine whether a blend of synthetic bread odorants could replace bread in a trap lure. In large‐arena laboratory experiments with laboratory‐reared GCR males, traps baited with rye bread not only captured eightfold more males than unbaited control traps but also most males released into bioassay arenas. Neither beer nor water enhanced the attractiveness of bread. Bread crust as a bait was more effective than bread crumbs. As Porapak Q headspace volatile extracts of rye bread attracted GCRs, all rye bread odorants in extracts were identified by gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry. Synthetic rye bread odorants and other known bread odorants were then assembled into a master blend. This master blend, and even partial blends lacking certain groups of organic volatiles such as aldehydes and ketones, proved very attractive to GCRs. We conclude that rye bread could be used as an effective bait in retainer traps or, laced with insecticide, as a food source in bait stations. A lure of synthetic bread odorants may eventually replace bread as bait, but the minimum number of essential odorants for that lure has yet to be determined.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntomologia Experimentalis et ApplicataSame topicInsects and Parasite InteractionsFrench-language works237,207