Management of Pea Leaf Weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and Development of a Nominal Threshold in Faba Beans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pea leaf weevil, Sitona lineatus (L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), can reduce the yield of field pea [Pisum sativum (L.) (Fabales: Fabaceae)] and faba bean [Vicia faba (L.) (Fabales: Fabaceae)]. Adults feed on the foliage and larvae feed on root nodules and nodule-associated Rhizobium Frank (Rhizobiales: Rhizobiacea) bacteria. In this study, we developed a data-based nominal threshold for pea leaf weevil in faba bean. We further tested the efficacy of insecticidal seed treatment and foliar insecticide (thiamethoxam and lambda-cyhalothrin, respectively), and nitrogen amendment for pea leaf weevil control using a multi-year field plot study at two sites in Alberta, Canada. Pea leaf weevil feeding damage significantly reduced faba bean yields. Thiamethoxam reduced adult and larval damage, and protected faba bean yield, while neither lambda-cyhalothrin nor a nitrogen amendment was effective in protecting yield. The percentage of seedlings with feeding on the terminal leaf had a negative relationship with yield and was used to estimate a nominal threshold near 15% of seedlings with terminal leaf damage. Since lambda-cyhalothrin is not effective in managing pea leaf weevil on faba bean, there is a need to research additional integrated pest management strategies to reduce prophylactic insecticidal seed treatments.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".