MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773428211 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n1p283

Hydroalcoholic Extract of Crambe on Sitophilus zeamais Insects and Maize Seed Quality

2017· article· en· W2773428211 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ana Paula Morais Mourão Simonetti, Divair Christ

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pest Control Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSitophilusGerminationHorticultureBiologyCrambeFactorial experimentBotanyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work is to evaluate the insecticidal and attractiveness of concentrations of hydroalcoholic extract of crambe grains on Sitophilus zeamais, and its effect on the physiological quality of corn seeds. The experiments were conducted at the Laboratory of Entomology and Seeds of the Assis Gurgacz University Center, in Cascavel, PR. The evaluation of attractiveness and insecticidal effect were evaluated using DIC, with 4 treatments (0, 5, 15 and 25% extract concentration) and 10 or 5 replications, respectively, totaling 40 experimental plots for the insect attractiveness test and 20 Experimental plots for the test of the insecticidal effect. For the experiment on the physiological quality of corn seeds submitted to the extracts, a DIC was set up in a 4 × 4 factorial scheme, factor 1 being the storage time of the seeds (0, 30, 60 and 90 days) and factor 2, the concentrations (0, 5, 15 and 25%), with 4 replicates, totaling 64 plots. Data were submitted to ANAVA, and means adjusted to regression or submitted to the Tukey test at 5% of probability, using the statistical program ASSISTAT®. The results evidenced the treatment with a hydroalcoholic extract in the concentration of 25% as the one with the highest insecticidal effect, and extract at 15% concentration yields a higher percentage of germination, normal seedlings, and mass of seedlings than the control. At 25% concentration, the extract do not negatively influence any of the parameters analyzed. Storage time above 60 days stimulates germination, mass and length of maize seedlings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicInsect Pest Control StrategiesFrench-language works237,207