Demography of Soybean Aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) at Summer Temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura, is now widely established in soybean, Glycine max L., production areas of the northern United States and southern Canada and is becoming an important economic pest. Temperature effect on soybean aphid fecundity and survivorship is not well understood. We determined the optimal temperature for soybean aphid growth and reproduction on soybean under controlled conditions. We constructed life tables for soybean aphid at 20, 25, 30, and 35°C with a photoperiod of 16:8 (L:D) h. Population growth rates were greatest at 25°C. As temperature increased, net fecundity, gross fecundity, generation time, and life expectancy decreased. The prereproductive period did not differ between 20 and 30°C; however, at 30°C aphids required more degree-days (base 8.6°C) to develop. Nymphs exposed to 35°C did not complete development, and all individuals died within 11 d. Reproductive periods were significantly different at all temperatures, with aphids reproducing longer and producing more progeny at 20 and 25°C than at 30 or 35°C. Using a modification of the nonlinear Logan model, we estimated upper and optimal developmental thresholds to be 34.9 and 27.8°C, respectively. At 25°C, aphid populations doubled in 1.5 d; at 20 and 30°C, populations doubled in 1.9 d.
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 | 0.001 | 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".