Development of economic thresholds for pea aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) management in lentil (Fabaceae) based on in-field insecticide efficacy trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pea aphid (Acyrthosiphom pisum Harris, Hemiptera: Aphididae) presents a significant economic challenge to lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) production in the major growing region of Saskatchewan, Canada. During 2019-2020, field experiments were conducted to optimize the management tools for pea aphid control on lentils. A randomized split-plot design was used with main plots consisting of different pea aphid pressures and subplots consisting of different insecticide treatments. The main plot design was aimed to assess the impact of A. pisum feeding on lentil yields during the late vegetative to early reproductive stages. Subplots of the study evaluated the efficacy of 3 insecticides in suppressing pea aphid populations on lentils. Lentil is susceptible to A. pisum feeding and requires management at low pest densities. The economic threshold for pea aphids on lentil crops varied depending on environmental conditions, ranging from 20 to 66 aphids per sweep, calculated using a discrete daily growth rate of 1.116. The estimated economic thresholds provided a 7-day lead time before aphid populations achieved the economic injury level (EIL). The EIL was defined as 78 ± 14 aphids per sweep net sample or 743 ± 137 cumulative aphid days from the first aphid present in the field. In addition, the results of the study found that, on average, foliar applications of insecticides containing the pyrethroid active ingredient lambda-cyhalothrin (IRAC group: 3A) reduced pea aphid populations by 83% compared with untreated control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".