MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321170023 · doi:10.1017/s0007485323000044

Survival of <i>Plodia interpunctella</i> (Hübner) larvae treated with 98% <i>N</i><sub>2</sub> and the life history of their next generation

2023· article· en· W4321170023 on OpenAlexaff
Yilin Huang, Dianxuan Wang, Fuji Jian

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Entomological Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pest Control Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyLarvaHatchingPupaInstarPopulationGeneration timePlodia interpunctellaPEST analysisAnimal scienceToxicologyReproductionBotanyEcologyPyralidae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding the development and reproduction of insects surviving controlled atmosphere treatment may help in developing sound pest management strategies. The developmental duration, survival percentage, and oviposition of Plodia interpunctella and its F1 generation were determined after the fifth instar larvae (the last-stage larvae) were exposed to 98% N2 for different exposure times. The survival percentage of the last-stage larvae treated with 98% N2 for 6, 4, 1.5, and 0 day was 70, 80, 91, and 100%, respectively when measured 24 h after treatment. The survival percentage of the last-stage larvae that developed to pupae was 37, 55, 73, and 96%, corresponding to the different exposure times. The developmental time needed to pass from pupa to adult emergence of specimens treated as the last-stage larvae were 8, 7, 6, and 6 days corresponding respectively to high N2 treatment after 6, 4, 1.5, and 0 day of exposure. The mean number of eggs laid by the subsequent females developed from the treated last-stage larvae was 35, 66, 81, and 123, respectively. The oviposition inhibition ratio of the F1 generation decreased by more than 33% compared with that of the parental generation. When the last-stage larvae were exposed to 98% N2 for longer than 4 days, the immature developmental time of surviving individuals in the F1 generation was delayed more than 6 days due to slower egg hatching and longer development of the first and second instar larvae stages. The population trend index of the F1 generation was lower when raised from the treated last-stage larvae than those from untreated controls.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Entomological ResearchSame topicInsect Pest Control StrategiesFrench-language works237,207