Evaluating the current integrated pest management recommendations in Canada for carrot weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and carrot rust fly (Diptera: Psilidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The primary insect pests in Canadian carrot production are carrot rust fly (Psila rosae (Fabricius); Diptera: Psilidae) and carrot weevil (Listronotus oregonensis (LeConte); Coleoptera: Curculionidae). An integrated pest management programme for these pests exists in Québec and Ontario, where most Canadian carrot (Daucus carota subsp. sativus (Hoffmann) Schübler and Martens; Apiaceae) production occurs. As current carrot insect integrated pest management recommendations are decades old, laboratory and field trials were performed to evaluate the carrot insect integrated pest management recommendations. Carrot weevil populations were evaluated in the laboratory for resistance to the primary product used for control, phosmet. Ontario carrot weevils exhibited negligible mortality when exposed to phosmet compared with > 80% mortality in a susceptible strain. Using data from a carrot integrated pest management programme, weather data was correlated with monitoring and damage data of both pests from historical records. Increased carrot weevil captures were weakly related to increased damage. Carrot weevil damage was reduced by following integrated pest management recommendations in one of three trials. No strong relationship between weather and carrot rust fly captures was identified, suggesting the degree day model for carrot rust fly activity needs revision. In field trials, carrot rust fly damage was negligible despite integrated pest management recommendations for insecticide applications. Future research should include improving carrot weevil monitoring and control and increasing the carrot rust fly action threshold to optimise insecticide applications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".