Exclusion of Flying Insect Pests From a Plastic Hoop Greenhouse by a Bamboo Blind-Type Electric Field Screen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study describes an economically efficient method for controlling viruliferous whiteflies in a plastic hoop greenhouse, using a bamboo blind-type electric field screen (Bb-EFS) to create a pest-free space. The Bb-EFS had a layer of insulated round iron conductor bars (IBs) and two electrostatic direct current voltage generators that supplied negative or positive voltage to the IBs. The IBs were placed parallel at 4-mm intervals and were connected alternately to a negative or positive voltage generator. Adult test insects (whiteflies, western flower thrips, and tomato leaf miner flies) were blown at up to 5 m/s towards the IBs to identify the voltage range that would capture all the test insects. The results showed that a force ≥ 5.0 kV was strong enough for the IBs to capture all test insects, despite a wind speed of 5 m/s. The Bb-EFS was practical for a greenhouse that experienced frequent invasion by numerous viruliferous whiteflies. Seedlings grew normally inside the Bb-EFS-installed greenhouse. As a supplementary method, an electrostatic insect sweeper and electrostatic flying insect catcher were used to trap whiteflies that avoided the Bb-EFS. Both pieces of apparatus were convenient and easy to operate onsite in a greenhouse environment and were used to trap whiteflies residing on tomato plants or flying inside the greenhouse during daily plant care. These methods controlled the whitefly population to negligible levels, and nearly all tomato plants produced normal fruits.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".