MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395013779 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30068

Mango headspace volatiles trigger differential responses of the mango fruit fly Ceratitis cosyra and its parasitoids

2024· article· en· W4395013779 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Raphael Njurai Miano, Teun Dekker, Egmont R. Rohwer, Tibebe Dejene Biasazin, Shepard Ndlela, Abdullahi A. Yusuf, Xavier Cheseto, Samira A. Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchDirektion für Entwicklung und ZusammenarbeitUniversity of PretoriaInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of the Republic of KenyaDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsBiologyBotanyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Before the introduction of Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) to sub-Saharan Africa, Ceratitis cosyra (Walker) was economically the most important pest in mango farming. Its native natural enemy, the solitary parasitoid Psyttalia cosyrae (Wilkinson), played a crucial role in C. cosyra bio-control, later complemented by the exotic parasitoids Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Ashmead) and Fopius arisanus (Sonan) among Integrated Pest Management (IPM) systems. To understand the in situ mango- C. cosyra -parasitoid tritrophic interaction, we assessed the responses of the fruit fly and the three parasitoids to headspace volatiles from various mango conditions. These conditions included non-infested mature unripe mangoes, C. cosyra -infested mangoes, 7th- and 9th-day post-infestation mangoes, non-infested ripe mangoes of three varieties (Kent, Apple, and Haden), and clean air (blank). We also compared the fruit fly's performance in the mango varieties and identified the chemical profiles of mango headspace volatiles. Ceratitis cosyra was attracted to both infested and non-infested mangoes (66–84 % of responsive C. cosyra ) and showed superior performance in Kent mango (72.1 % of the 287 puparia recovered) compared to Apple and Haden varieties. Fopius arisanus displayed a stronger attraction to the volatiles of C. cosyra -infested mangoes (68–70 %), while P. cosyrae and D. longicaudata were significantly attracted to the 9th-day post-infestation mangoes (68–78 %) compared to non-infested mango volatiles. Gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy showed substantial quantitative and qualitative differences in volatile profiles among mango treatments. Esters predominated in non-infested ripe, 7th- and 9th-day post-infestation mangoes, while monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes were most dominant in the other treatments. The in situ experiments underscored varying preferences of the species for mango headspace volatiles and their subsequent treatments. These results provide valuable insights for further exploration, specifically in identifying the key volatiles responsible for species responses, to facilitate the development of applicable selective semiochemicals for managing species of African fruit fly.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicInsect behavior and control techniquesFrench-language works237,207