MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407296426 · doi:10.3390/insects16020189

Formulation of Entomopathogenic Nematodes for Above-Ground Use Against Tomato Leaf Miner, Phthorimaea absoluta

2025· article· en· W4407296426 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bancy Waithira Waweru, Joëlle Kajuga, Athanase Hategekimana, A. Ndereyimana, Lydie Kankundiye, Christine Umulisa, Alphonse Nyombayire, M. Mutumwinka, Primitive M. Ishimwe, Didace Bazagwira, Grace C. Mukundiyabo, Vincent de Paul Bigirimana, Xun Yan, József Kiss, Stefan Toepfer

Bibliographic record

VenueInsects · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEntomopathogenic Microorganisms in Pest Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchDirektion für Entwicklung und ZusammenarbeitForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeNational Commission for Science and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsTuta absolutaBiologyLeaf minerGelechiidaeLepidoptera genitaliaPhthorimaea operculellaHorticultureBiological pest controlBotanyToxicologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tomato leaf miner Phthorimaea (syn. Tuta) absoluta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) is invasive in many agricultural regions. Its larvae feed inside leaf mines or tomato fruits and are difficult to reach with plant protection products. In contrast, entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs) are highly virulent and can search for larvae. The challenge is to formulate EPNs to remain protected on a sprayed leaf surface until they enter the mines. We tested 11 formulations, including 2 oils, 4 gels or thickeners, 2 surfactants, 2 UV protectants, water, and combinations with and without the EPN Steinernema carpocapsae (Weiser) RW14-G-R3a-2 (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae), under non-closed low-humidity conditions. Six tomato leaf experiments with 1000 EPNs sprayed per leaf showed that EPNs in 0.25 to 0.5% canola oil or in 5% alkyl polyglycoside surfactant were the most effective (26 to 37%). Other formulations and an insecticide had less or no effect. Seven other bioassays showed that most formulations did not adversely affect EPN survival or pathogenicity. We assume that formulations of EPNs can be further improved, such as with other flowable gels or combinations, and encourage investment in the development of practical and economic protective sprayable formulations of EPNs against leaf miners to reduce reliance on chemical insecticides.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsectsSame topicEntomopathogenic Microorganisms in Pest ControlFrench-language works237,207