Effect of Apple Rootstock on Hoplocampa testudinea (Klug) Host Choice and Larval Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hoplocampa testudinea, the European Apple Sawfly, is an important pest in apple throughout Canada. Losses can be up to 80% in some areas. Adults of H. testudinea are active during the bloom period and larvae are contained with the developing fruitlet, creating a challenging management situation. Chemical treatments applied either pre- or post-bloom may not reduce the population sufficiently to prevent damage in the current year. H. testudinea has been shown to exhibit a preference for some apple cultivars over others in Europe and North America, offering a potential host-based option to reduce impact from this pest. In this study, we explored whether rootstock would impact H. testudinea development as demonstrated in cultivar. A selection of rootstocks from within ‘Honeycrisp’ and Modi® plantings located at the Kentville Research and Development Centre were selected and the following variables were studied: percentage of clusters with eggs and number of eggs oviposited during bloom, development of the larvae within the fruitlets, titratable acid firmness and soluble solids evaluated at two times during fruitlet development, and damage observed at harvest. Results showed that female H. testudinea did not oviposit significantly more on certain rootstocks over others, even though the percentage of apples showing damage at harvest was significant across rootstock for ‘Honeycrisp’. Percentage of fruitlets showing secondary damage and dropping from the tree was significant across rootstock with a ‘Honeycrisp’ scion in 2021. Secondary damage in this planting correlated with change in acidity. These results suggest that rootstock does not strongly affect H. testudinea performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".