Behavior of wireworms (Coleoptera: Elateridae) exposed to wheat seed treated with novel (broflanilide, isocycloseram) and previously registered insecticides in a soil bioassay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the de-registration of lindane as a cereal crop seed treatment for wireworm control in North America, most of the research efforts to find replacements have focused on neonicotinoid, diamide, pyrethroid, phenyl pyrazole, and most recently, meta-diamide and isoxazoline insecticide classes. Although insecticides within these classes have been shown to provide cereal crop protection from wireworm damage, not all insecticides will significantly reduce wireworm populations in the field. To investigate this, we exposed wireworms (Agriotes obscurus L. and Agriotes lineatus L.) to wheat seeds treated with insecticides in the above insecticide classes in soil bioassays in the lab, with a focus on the newly developed meta-diamide broflanilide and the isoxazoline isocycloseram. Various wireworm behaviors (eg repellency) were observed in soil window studies for 3 h, and symptoms of toxicity were recorded upon wireworm removal at 24 h and again at 7 d. No repellency was recorded from seed treated with broflanilide, isocycloseram, thiamethoxam (neonicotinoid), cyantraniliprole (diamide), and fipronil (phenyl pyrazole), but moderate repellency occurred with the pyrethroid λ-cyhalothrin. After 24 h exposure, thiamethoxam, cyantraniliprole, and λ-cyhalothrin treatments had elicited only minor morbidity symptoms, which had mostly disappeared after 7 d. Broflanilide, isocycloseram, and fipronil treatments, however, progressed from initial minor morbidity symptoms to more irreversible morbidity symptoms after 7 d. These data and earlier lab and field trials explain why field populations of wireworms are reduced by broflanilide, isocycloseram, and fipronil treatments relative to neonicotinoid, diamide, and pyrethroid 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 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".