Community-level and phenological responses of emerging aquatic insects exposed to 3 neonicotinoid insecticides: An in situ wetland limnocorral approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seasonal aquatic insect emergence represents a critical subsidy link between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Early and late instar larvae developing in wetlands near neonicotinoid-treated cropland can be at risk of chronic insecticide exposure. In the present study, an in situ wetland limnocorral experiment compared emergent insect community responses to imidacloprid, clothianidin, and thiamethoxam. Twenty-one limnocorrals were dosed weekly for 9 wk to target peak nominal doses of 0.0, 0.05, or 0.5 μg/L, followed by a 6-wk recovery period. Thirty-nine aquatic insect taxa were recorded but 11 taxa groups made up 97% of the community composition. Principal response curves (PRCs) indicated that during the dosing period, community composition among the treatments resembled the controls. During the 6-wk recovery period, significant deviance was observed in the high imidacloprid treatment with similar trends in the clothianidin treatment, suggesting that community effects from neonicotinoid exposure can be delayed. Non-biting midges (Diptera: Chironomidae) and damselflies (Odonata: Zygoptera) emerged 18 to 25 d earlier than controls in the imidacloprid and clothianidin neonicotinoid treatments, with no effects from thiamethoxam treatments. These data suggest that phenology and subtle community effects can occur at measured neonicotinoid concentrations of 0.045 (imidacloprid) and 0.038 μg/L (clothianidin) under chronic repeated exposure conditions. Synchronization and community dynamics are critical to aquatic insects and consumers; thus, neonicotinoids may have broad implications for wetland ecosystem function. Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:2401-2412. © 2018 SETAC.
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".