Mortality of a Wireworm, Agriotes obscurus (Coleoptera: Elateridae), after Topical Application of Various Insecticides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ten insecticides representing seven chemical groups were applied at various concentrations topically by using a Potter Spray Tower to evaluate their relative toxicities on the European wireworm Agriotes obscurus L. (Coleoptera: Elateridae). Wireworms were stored at 15°C after exposure to organophosphate (OP) (chlorpyrifos, diazinon), pyrethroid (tefluthrin), thianicotinoid (thiamethoxam, clothianidin), chloronicotinoid (imidacloprid, acetamiprid), phenyl pyrazole (fipronil), organochlorine (lindane), and spinosyn (spinosad) insecticides, and their postapplication health was evaluated weekly for up to 301 d. LC50, LC90, LT50, and LT90 values were calculated for each chemical except acetamiprid, and compared with those of lindane, clothianidin, and chlorpyrifos. Wireworms exposed to OPs died or recovered more quickly (LT50 < 20 d, LT90 < 50 d), than those exposed to all other insecticides tested except tefluthrin (LT50 = 25.5 d, LT90 = 66.5 d). Wireworms exposed to sublethal concentrations of all neonicotinoids quickly became moribund after application but made a full recovery. Wireworms exposed to fipronil at concentrations near the LC90 value showed no intoxication symptoms for up to 35 d, and they did not recover after symptoms developed. For each chemical, increasing the concentration increased the time required for wireworms to recover but decreased the time required to kill wireworms. Fipronil was highly toxic to wireworms (LC50 = 0.0001%), but acetamiprid (LC50 = 1.82%), imidacloprid (LC50 = 0.83%), tefluthrin (LC50 = 0.23%), diazinon (LC50 = 0.54%), and spinosad (LC50 = 0.51%) were not. The toxicity of both clothianidin (LC50 = 0.07%) and thiamethoxam (LC50 = 0.17%) were similar to those of lindane (LC50 = 0.06%) and chlorpyrifos (LC50 = 0.10%).
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".