MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107006240 · doi:10.3390/insects11120837

Combined Effects of Mating Disruption, Insecticides, and the Sterile Insect Technique on Cydia pomonella in New Zealand

2020· article· en· W3107006240 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachael Horner, P.L. Lo, David J. Rogers, J.T.S. Walker, D. M. Suckling

Bibliographic record

VenueInsects · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pheromone Research and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCodling mothMating disruptionBiologyOrchardPhytosanitary certificationSterile insect techniqueTortricidaeToxicologyPEST analysisPopulationMatingInfestationPest controlHorticultureLarvaAgronomyBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Codling moth was introduced into New Zealand, and remains a critical pest for the apple industry. Apples exported to some markets require strict phytosanitary measures to eliminate the risk of larval infestation. Mating disruption and insecticide applications are the principal means of suppression in New Zealand. We tested the potential for the sterile insect technique (SIT) to supplement these measures to achieve local eradication or suppression of this pest. SIT was trialed in an isolated group of six integrated fruit production (IFP) orchards and one organic orchard (total 391 ha), using sterilized insects imported from Canada, with release by unmanned aerial vehicle and from the ground. Eradication was not achieved across the region, but a very high level of codling moth suppression was achieved at individual orchards after the introduction of sterile moths in combination with mating disruption and larvicides. After six years of releases, catches of wild codling moths at three IFP orchards (224 ha) were 90-99% lower than in 2013-2014, the year before releases began. Catches at three other IFP orchards (129 ha) decreased by 67-97% from the year before releases began (2015-2016), from lower initial levels. At a certified organic orchard with a higher initial population under only organic larvicides and mating disruption, by 2019-2020, there was an 81% reduction in wild moths capture from 2016-2017, the year before releases began.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsectsSame topicInsect Pheromone Research and ControlFrench-language works237,207