Use of a Sprayable Sex Pheromone Formulation in Landscape-Level Control of Choristoneura fumiferana Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Choristoneura fumiferana (SBW) is a major defoliating pest of balsam fir and spruce in eastern North America. As part of an integrated management strategy for SBW, we evaluated the effectiveness of mating disruption as a landscape-level population control tactic. Using a sprayable formulation (CONFOUNDSBW) containing a synthetic sex pheromone blend, we treated five 300 ha blocks in Northern New Brunswick with an aerially applied microencapsulated mixture. There were significant reductions in adult trap catches in treated blocks compared to untreated control blocks. Branch sampling in treated blocks showed uniform distribution of CONFOUNDSBW deposition throughout the blocks. Population densities following treatment were not significantly affected when compared to densities in control blocks, or prior to treatment. Analysis of egg:adult ratios indicates that no immigration events occurred within treatment or control blocks. The lack of population reduction following treatment strongly suggests that widespread application of CONFOUNDSBW at a rate of 50 g of active ingredient per hectare is not an effective tool in controlling SBW populations.
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".