MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215871193 · doi:10.2987/21-7030

Ground Applications of Vectobac® WDG with A1 Super-Duty Mist Sprayer® and Micronair® AU5000 Atomizer for Suppression of Aedes aegypti Populations in the Florida Keys

2021· article· en· W3215871193 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Heidi Murray, Catherine A. Pruszynski, Lawrence J. Hribar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Mosquito Control Association · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAedes aegyptiSprayerBiologyLarvaToxicologyMistAcreBioassayPesticideMosquito controlEcologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2011, the Florida Keys Mosquito Control District (FKMCD) has used the WALS® application strategy with VectoBac® WDG containing Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis via helicopter in Key West for the control of Aedes aegypti larval populations. In 2018, FKMCD conducted a study to determine the effectiveness of using a trailer-mounted A1 Super Duty Mist Sprayer® (A1 Mist Sprayers) with a Micronair® AU5000 (Micron Group) atomizer to apply VectoBac WDG by ground at the rate of 0.5 lb/acre (0.56 kg/ha). Bioassay cups were placed in a residential area encompassing open, moderate, and heavy cover scenarios between 0 and 300 ft (0-91.44 m) perpendicular to the spray line. An application rate of 0.5 lbs/acre (0.56 kg/ha) was used. Bioassay cups were collected after application and returned to the laboratory where 100 ml of distilled water and 10 F1 generation Ae. aegypti larvae were added. Laval mortality was monitored at 2, 4, and 24 h. Three separate runs were completed during the summer of 2018. Average larval mortality at 24 h was >90%. The field trial demonstrated sufficient efficacy to introduce this method of larviciding into operational use.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Mosquito Control AssociationSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207