Assessing the Potential of Inoculative Field Releases of Telenomus remus to Control Spodoptera frugiperda in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the threat caused by the fall armyworm to African maize farmers, we conducted a series of field release studies with the egg parasitoid Telenomus remus in Ghana. Three releases of ≈15,000 individuals each were conducted in maize plots of 0.5 ha each in the major and minor rainy seasons of 2020, and compared to no-release control plots as well as to farmer-managed plots with chemical pest control. No egg mass parasitism was observed directly before the first field release. Egg mass parasitism reached 33% in the T. remus release plot in the major rainy season, while 72–100% of egg masses were parasitized in the minor rainy season, during which pest densities were much lower. However, no significant difference in egg mass parasitism was found among the T. remus release plots, the no-release control plots and the farmer-managed plots. Similarly, no significant decrease in larval numbers or plant damage was found in the T. remus release fields compared to the no-release plots, while lower leaf and tassel damage was observed in farmer-managed plots. Larval parasitism due to other parasitoids reached 18–42% in the major rainy season but was significantly lower in the minor rainy season, with no significant differences among treatments. We did not observe significant differences in cob damage or yield among the three treatments. However, the lack of any significant differences between the release and no-release plots, which may be attributed to parasitoid dispersal during the five weeks of observation, would require further studies to confirm. Interestingly, a single application of Emamectin benzoate did not significantly affect the parasitism rates of T. remus and, thus, merits further investigation in the context of developing IPM strategies against FAW.
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) | 0.001 | 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".