Insecticidal Potency of<i> Newbouldia laevis </i>Oil Extracts against<i> Sitrotoga cerealella </i>, An Important Pest of Paddy Rice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study was conducted to evaluate the insecticidal potency of Newbouldia laevis extracts against Sitrotoga cerealella in the laboratory at temperature of 28±2°C and relative humidity of 75±5%. Oil from the leaf, stem bark and root bark of N. laevis was extracted using methanol as solvent and 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5% concentration of each oil extract were prepared. Results obtained revealed that oil extracted from all the parts of the plant had significant effect on the mortality of the moth but the root bark oil extract appeared to be most effective since it was the only one to achieve 100% insect mortality within 72 h of application at 4% concentration and it requires low concentration1.59 (LC 50 ) to achieve 50% mortality. The extracts reduced the adult emergence of the insect and their ability to cause seed weight loss. Both leaf and root extracts at 4 and 5% concentration prevented adult emergence while seed weight was prevented by all the three plant parts at 4 and 5% concentration. Water absorption capacity as well as viability of the protected paddy was not affected by the oil extracts. Nonetheless, there were significant differences between treatments and the controls in all the parameters tested except for water absorption capacity and viability test. The result obtained presented root extract of N. laevis to be more effective than other plant parts and therefore could be introduce as a counter measure for the control of S. cerealella in storage.
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".