Modeling Leafhopper Nymphs in Temperate Vineyards for Optimal Sampling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cicadellids (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) are occasional pests of vineyards in temperate areas, and unchecked populations can build up to high densities to cause leaf burn followed by defoliation and yield loss. Therefore, an optimal sampling scheme would allow determination of risk at minimal cost. Because the development of leafhopper nymphs and feeding injury is closely tied to temperature, a model driven by the accumulation of degree-days was developed to predict leafhopper cumulative abundance at 5, 50, and 95% levels in vineyards. The model was based on 22 data sets collected over 7 yr in three vineyards in southern Quebec. It was based on the cumulative abundance of nymphs of the eastern grape leafhopper; the grapevine leafhopper; the threebanded leafhopper; the Virginia creeper leafhopper; and Erythroneura vitifex Fitch. The lower threshold temperature for development was 8°C. Paired t-tests and the forecasting efficiency confirmed the validity of the model. The model indicated that monitoring for leafhoppers in vineyards should be initiated at 630 DD (5% cumulative abundance) and terminated at 1,140 DD (95% cumulative abundance). Maximum abundance would be between 850 and 860 DD (50% cumulative abundance) calculated from 1 March.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".