Laboratory and Field Evaluation of Host-Related Foraging Odor-Cue Combinations to Attract Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The invasive spotted-wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura), is a major pest of soft-skinned fruits. Since its introduction into North America and Europe, significant progress has been made in understanding the volatile cues used by this fly during food, oviposition site, and mate finding. Despite this progress, commercially available lures are non-selective. Here, we tested two Hanseniaspora uvarum (Niehaus) yeast compounds (isoamyl acetate and isobutyl acetate) and a leaf compound β-cyclocitral alone and in combination with a blend of four fermentation compounds ('Fermentation lure': acetic acid, ethanol, methionol, and acetoin) to improve D. suzukii attraction and selectivity. In laboratory assays, males and females were attracted to all seven individual compounds, although in electrophysiological assays, their antennae exhibited a dose-dependent response to only four of these compounds. In two-choice cage studies, the Fermentation lure was more attractive to D. suzukii than water controls, whereas β-cyclocitral and the mixture of isoamyl acetate and isobutyl acetate were not attractive in this larger-cage study. Moreover, adding the two-component H. uvarum compound blend to the Fermentation lure reduced D. suzukii attraction to the Fermentation blend. When these experiments were repeated in blueberry, raspberry, blackberry, and cherry orchards across several states in the United States over 2 yr, similar outcomes were observed: β-cyclocitral or the mixture of the H. uvarum blend did not improve the attractiveness of the Fermentation lure or its selectivity. This study demonstrates that cues from different sources may interfere with each other and reduce D. suzukii attraction to otherwise attractive odor combinations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it