Aqueous Extracts of Species of the Genus Campomanesia (Myrtaceae) Affect Biological Characteristics of Plutella xylostella (Linnaeus, 1758) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plutella xylostella (Linnaeus, 1758) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) is an insect pest that causes great damage to Brassica cultures. It is necessary to develop alternative control methods, because this pest is resistant to many synthetic insecticides that are harmful to the environment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of aqueous extracts of Campomanesia adamantium, C. guazumifolia, and C. xanthocarpa on the life cycle of P. xylostella. These aqueous extracts were prepared in a concentration of 10 g/mL and then applied on cabbage disks of 4 cm2 to feed the larvae until they reached pupal stage. The disks were evaluated daily during the larval stage and replaced every 24 hours. The experiment consisted of ten replicates, each replicate containing five subsamples. The parameters evaluated were larval and pupal survival, pupal biomass, gender ratio, male and female longevity, number of eggs, fecundity, oviposition period and egg survival. The C. xanthocarpa extract increased larval stage and decreased pupal biomass and oviposition period. The C. adamantium extract decreased larval duration, pupal biomass, male longevity, and oviposition period. The C. guazumifolia extract decreased larval stage, male longevity, and oviposition period. The chemical composition of the extracts of Campomanesia species presented flavonoids such as quercetin, phenolic compounds, and tannins, and the highest retention time occurred in C. adamantium. Thus, the extracts of Campomanesia species were effective in decreasing and controlling the oviposition period of P. xylostella, probably because of the presence of flavonoids, which indicates a possible antioxidant potential and, therefore, the observed antibiosis.
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".