Limoniic Acid and Its Analog as Trap Lures for Pest<i>Limonius</i>Species (Coleoptera: Elateridae) in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four species of Limonius wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae), L. californicus, L. canus, L. infuscatus and L. agonus, are serious crop pests in North America. Limoniic acid, (E)-4-ethyloct-4-enoic acid, has been reported as a sex pheromone component of female L. californicus and L. canus, and a sex attractant for male L. infuscatus. In the same study, both limoniic acid and the analog (E)-5-ethyloct-4-enoic acid were highly attractive in field experiments. Moreover, six carboxylic acids in headspace volatiles of Limonius females elicited responses from male antennae but were not tested for behavioral activity. Here, we report trap catch data of Limonius spp. obtained in field experiments at 27 sites across North America. All four Limonius species were attracted to limoniic acid and to the analog but not to the carboxylic acids. Adding these carboxylic acids to limoniic acid, or to the analog, reduced its attractiveness. In dose-response studies, trap lures containing 0.4 mg or 4 mg of limoniic acid afforded large captures of L. californicus and L. infuscatus. Neither limoniic acid nor the analog were deterrent to other elaterid pest species. The broad attractiveness of limoniic acid to Limonius spp., and its non-deterrent effect on heterogeners, may facilitate the development of generic pheromone-based monitoring and management tools for multiple click beetle species.
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".