Paper · 2006

Remote Sensing, Sampling and Simulation Applications in Analyses of Insect Dispersion and Abundance in Cotton

Jeffrey L. Willers; James M. McKinion; J. N. Jenkins

7
claims
15
verbatim quotes
3
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Simulation was employed to create stratified simple random samples of different sample unit sizes to represent tarnished plant bug abundance at different densities within various habitats of simulated cotton fields. These samples were used to investigate dispersion patterns of this cotton insect. It was found that the assessment of spatial pattern varied as a function of sample unit size and was independent of large pest densities. Using this knowledge, it was demonstrated how remote sensing assists field scouts in estimating pest abundance and the pattern of dispersion within commercial cotton fields. For the majority of pest management decisions in commercial fields, both the simulation data and field results supported the robust assumption that cotton pests are randomly dispersed at different densities within homogenous habitats. Therefore, it was possible to estimate the boundaries of different pest densities by mapping habitat variability within cotton fields using high resolution, geo-referenced, remotely sensed imagery. Once boundaries for various densities of the pest were established, site-specific prescriptions of pesticides were implemented, reducing pest management costs and the amount of pesticide applied to the environment.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 7

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Estimated tarnished plant bug spatial pattern varied with sample unit size.

Treatment
sample unit sizee0
Interactor
tarnished plant bugLygus lineolarise1peste0
Outcome
assessment of spatial patterne0
Direction
variede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Lygus lineolaris
Lygus lineolaris · InteractorPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the assessment of spatial pattern varied as a function of sample unit size”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 316–390 · show in text ↑
e1

“tarnished plant bug abundance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 111–140 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spatial pattern assessment was independent of large pest densities.

Treatment
large pest densitiese0
Outcome
assessment of spatial patterne0
Direction
was independente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the assessment of spatial pattern varied as a function of sample unit size and was independent of large pest densities”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 316–434 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Remote sensing helped scouts estimate pest abundance and dispersion in commercial cotton fields.

Interactor
peste0pest
Outcome
estimating pest abundance and the pattern of dispersione0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“remote sensing assists field scouts in estimating pest abundance and the pattern of dispersion within commercial cotton fields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 482–608 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton pests were randomly dispersed at different densities within homogeneous habitats.

Interactor
pestse0pest
Outcome
cotton pests are randomly dispersede0
Qualifier
within homogenous habitatse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cotton pests are randomly dispersed at different densities within homogenous habitats”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 758–843 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mapping habitat variability permitted estimation of pest density boundaries.

Interactor
peste0pest
Outcome
estimate the boundaries of different pest densitiese0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“it was possible to estimate the boundaries of different pest densities by mapping habitat variability within cotton fields using high resolution, geo-referenced, remotely sensed imagery”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 856–1041 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Site-specific pesticide prescriptions reduced pest management costs.

Treatment
site-specific prescriptions of pesticidese0
Outcome
pest management costse0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“site-specific prescriptions of pesticides were implemented, reducing pest management costs and the amount of pesticide applied to the environment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1111–1256 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Site-specific pesticide prescriptions reduced pesticide application to the environment.

Treatment
site-specific prescriptions of pesticidese0
Outcome
amount of pesticide applied to the environmente0
Direction
reducinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“site-specific prescriptions of pesticides were implemented, reducing pest management costs and the amount of pesticide applied to the environment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1111–1256 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 103–109 · show in text ↑

insecticide · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

76 papers: 59 positive, 17 negative or no effect

58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

72 papers more in this group

See all 76 papers →

climate site · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

insecticide · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

10 papers: 9 positive, 1 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

climate site · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

41 papers: 18 positive, 23 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

37 papers more in this group

See all 41 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.