MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410218650 · doi:10.1016/j.jspr.2025.102674

Chemical cues in grain storage: A review on semiochemical types, pest behavior, and control strategies

2025· review· en· W4410218650 on OpenAlexafffund
T. Anukiruthika, Digvir S. Jayas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Stored Products Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pest Control Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSemiochemicalPEST analysisPest controlChemical controlBiologyIntegrated pest managementAgronomyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The excessive reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides has led to adverse environmental impacts, prompting the exploration of sustainable alternatives like semiochemicals (pheromones and allelochemicals) for pest management. These chemical compounds offer innovative approaches to controlling stored product insects, which pose significant threats to global food security by infesting and degrading grains and stored food products. This review delves into different kinds of semiochemicals, their action mechanism, and their applications in insect control methods, including mass trapping, mating disruption, attract-and-kill, and push-and-pull strategies. Recent advancements at the molecular level, particularly in understanding pheromone receptors, have enhanced insights into insect recognition and response to chemical signals. Different kinds of semiochemicals and their roles in managing stored grain pests belonging to Coleoptera , Lepidoptera , and Psocoptera are discussed. Additionally, the effectiveness of various pheromone-based traps, such as sticky, funnel and cone, pitfall, and light-activated traps, in grain storage monitoring are discussed, along with insights from field and laboratory case studies. Integration of pheromone traps with biological, chemical, and mechanical control methods is examined to highlight the potential for holistic pest management strategies. Despite their effectiveness, challenges such as environmental variability and species-specific responses persist. Future directions emphasize innovations in pheromone synthesis, trap design, and interdisciplinary approaches to enhance scalability and applicability across diverse storage ecosystems. This review underscores the critical role of semiochemical-mediated techniques in reducing stored product losses, offering a sustainable and effective alternative to chemical pesticides. • Covers semiochemicals, including pheromones and allelochemicals. in pest ecology and behavior. • Outlines pest control strategies like attracticides, mass trapping, and push-pull. • Reviews trap types and effectiveness in stored product pest monitoring. • Discusses combining pheromones with other methods and related challenges. • Summarizes global trends and future directions in semiochemical pest 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 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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Stored Products ResearchSame topicInsect Pest Control StrategiesFrench-language works237,207