<i>Rosmarinus officinalis</i> as a natural insecticide: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arthropods’ resistance to synthetic pesticides and environmental issues has encouraged scientists to develop alternatives to these noxious materials. In this respect, botanical types have attracted lots of attention and among them, Rosmarinus officinalis from Lamiaceae family has been found as a versatile candidate. According to the literature, a wide range of research were conducted to prove the efficacy of R. officinalis against arthropods and this study aims to review, discuss, and consolidate their results by dividing them into four groups of stored product pests (SPP), medically important insects (MII), agricultural pests (AP), and other arthropods (OA). Most studies focused on pests as follows: SPP: Callosobruchus maculatus, Tribolium castaneum, Sitophilus granaries, Sitophilus oryzae, and Tribolium confusum, MII: Aedes aegypti, Culex pipiens, Culex quinquefasciatus, and Anopheles stephensi, AP: Tetranychus urticae, Trichoplusia ni, and Myzus persicae and OA: Phytoseiulus persimilis. Finally, some points and suggestions were provided for development of botanical insecticides.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".