MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253382324 · doi:10.7717/peerj.5880

Field evaluation of the potential for avian exposure to clothianidin following the planting of clothianidin-treated corn seed

2018· article· en· W4253382324 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sean L. McGee, Melissa L. Whitfield Åslund, Daiana Duca, Nicole Kopysh, Tereza Dan, Loren D. Knopper, Larry W. Brewer

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
FundersBayer CropScience
KeywordsSowingClothianidinForagingSeed treatmentBiologyMorningAgronomyAnimal scienceGerminationToxicologyPesticideEcologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to quantify consumption of clothianidin-treated corn seed by birds following standard planting practices. Based on post-planting seed counts on 21 fields in southwestern Ontario, Canada, between 29 and 813 seeds/ha (mean of 224 ± 167 (SD)) were estimated to remain on the soil surface immediately post planting (i.e., less than one seed per 10 m 2 ). This represents between 0.03 and 1.2% of the total sown seeds. The number of seeds missing on each field on the third day after planting as a result of any process (e.g., removal by foraging birds or mammals or burial as a result of heavy rains) ranged from 0 to 136 seeds/ha (0 to 0.0136 seeds/m 2 ). Behavior monitoring of individual birds and 24 h remote video surveillance were deployed to investigate how much of the treated seed remaining on the soil surface was consumed by birds. Spotting scopes were used to monitor the full duration of the field visits of 596 individual birds during morning hours for three consecutive days after planting on the 21 fields. Two birds were observed consuming treated seeds (one seed each) and three birds consumed seeds for which the treatment status could not be visually confirmed. Additionally, constant (24 h) video surveillance for 2–4 days immediately after planting was deployed at 24 areas where multiple treated seeds were found on the soil surface. Across 1,380 h of collected video footage (including both day and night periods), no birds were observed to consume any treated seeds. This study provides field evidence of two factors that determine exposure of birds to clothianidin-treated corn seeds: (1) standard sowing practices in Ontario are effective at burying treated seeds such that the proportion of sown seeds that remain on the soil surface after planting is low, and (2) birds monitored on these fields consumed very few of the clothianidin-treated corn seeds remaining on the soil surface after planting. As these results are dependent on planting techniques and seed characteristics, they are not necessarily applicable to other types of clothianidin treated seed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207