MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230445071 · doi:10.1079/cabicomm-62-8100

Evidence Note Tomato leafminer (Tuta absoluta): Impacts and coping strategies for Africa

2019· report· en· W4230445071 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Practices and Plant Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of ChinaDepartment for International Development
KeywordsTuta absolutaGeographyToxicologyCropSocioeconomicsAgroforestryForestryBiologyPEST analysisHorticultureEconomicsGelechiidae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recently introduced tomato leafminer, Tuta absoluta, has become the most important pest constraint to tomato production in Africa. Spreading at an average 800 km/year, it is now present in 41 African countries. The socio-economic impacts of Tuta absoluta were assessed through a household survey in Kenya and Zambia in 2018, covering 400 respondents in Kenya and 426 in Zambia. We found that 97.9% of farmers in Zambia, and 99% in Kenya reported Tuta absoluta as the main problem on tomato. A majority of farmers in Zambia (57%) had lost a large proportion of their crop to Tuta absoluta, compared to 41% in Kenya. Mean seasonal production loss based on farmers' own estimates was 114,000 tonnes for Kenya and 10,700 tonnes for Zambia, equivalent to US$ 59.3, and US$ 8.7 million in economic losses respectively. Pesticides were the predominant control method for Tuta absoluta, used by 96.5% of farmers in Kenya and 97.6% of farmers in Zambia, with 6.4% using highly toxic products. However, only 27.2% and 17.2% of farmers in Kenya and Zambia, respectively, indicated the pesticide treatments were very successful. In Kenya, 73.1% of farmers applied 1-5 sprays/season, and in Zambia 29.2% applied 1-5 sprays, and 33.9% applied 6-10. The average amount spent on pesticides per household against Tuta absoluta was US$ 47.2 in Kenya, about US$ 33.7/ha, while in Zambia, this cost was US$ 42.1 per household, and US$ 9.4/ha. The average cost for a pesticide application against Tuta absoluta in Kenya was US$ 12.3, and US$ 4.2 in Zambia. The implications of these findings for sustainable management of this pest are discussed.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgricultural Practices and Plant GeneticsFrench-language works237,207