A Study On Bio Efficacy Of Cyantraniliprole 10.6% OD Against Major Sucking Pests Of Watermelon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyantraniliprole, 10.6% OD, was evaluated in the field against major sucking pests of watermelon at Jaguli Instructional Farm, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya (BCKV) during 2020-21. The study took place during the kharif season, and the watermelon variety named ‘Krishna’ was selected and grown with proper agronomic practices. A total of three sprays were done starting from the ETL of the pest population. The spraying was done at ten days intervals with four different doses of Cyantraniliprole, 10.6% OD along with Imidacloprid 17.8% SL @ 100 g a.i./ha, Spinosad 45% SC @ 73 g a.i./ha (standard checks) and an untreated control. All the treatment is arranged in randomized block design with three replications, each consisting of seven treatments. The results revealed that treatments cyantraniliprole 10.6% OD @ 120 g a.i/ha and 90 g a.i/ha were substantially more potent with regard to its efficacy on the basis of three sprays, compared to 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 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".