Botanical secondary metabolites as alternatives for pest management in Cuba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants have historically been used in agricultural practices in Cuba; nevertheless, the Cuban flora has not yet been fully studied as a potential source of pesticides, partly due to its great diversity. At the National Centre for Animal and Plant Health (CENSA), systematic research on more than 100 plant species belonging to several families has been conducted in recent years. The protocol involves the establishment of bioassay conditions, the isolation and characterization of bioactive compounds, assessment of compatibility with other biological control agents, mode of action studies and the semi-synthesis of analogues using biotechnological techniques. Among the secondary metabolites studied, essential oils obtained from plants belonging to the families Piperaceae, Lamiaceae, Apiaceae, Rutaceae, and Myrtaceae stood out as a promising group due to their efficacy and spectrum of action under laboratory and semi-controlled conditions. As botanical pesticides, the main areas of use may include protected crops, nurseries, seed treatments in protected and field-grown crops, and in stored product pest management. The use of known botanicals and the identification of local candidates for developing phytosanitary products offer alternatives that may combine efficiency and safety for pest management in Cuban agriculture.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".