Effect of Spring And Winter Temperatures on Winter Moth (Geometridae: Lepidoptera) Larval Eclosion in New England
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field and laboratory experiments were conducted to elucidate various factors influencing the temperature-dependent larval eclosion of winter moth, <em>Operophtera brumata </em>L,<em> </em>in New England. We found no difference in duration of the embryonic stage of eggs reared from larvae collected in Massachusetts (MA) and on Vancouver Island, British Columbia (BC), where winter temperatures are rarely below freezing. The number of growing degree days (GDD) required for larval eclosion declined with the number of days chilled in the laboratory and number of days below freezing in the field, confirming the findings of previous studies. Thus, eggs hatched with fewer GDD, when the spring came later than usual. Date of oviposition had no effect on date of hatch. Eggs laid by naturally occurring (feral) females hatched sooner with lower GDD than eggs from laboratory-reared females from MA and BC held on the same trees over the winter. South-facing eggs on the stems of trees hatched on average 1.6 days sooner than north-facing eggs. Growing degree days calculated from bi-hourly measures of temperature were 15% greater than GDD estimates based on the average of daily maximum and minimum temperatures, as used by many GDD estimates made for online sources. Over two years, the mean GDD in ⁰C for hatch of feral eggs based on bihourly temperature measurements, a 1 Jan start date and a 3.9⁰C developmental threshold was 176.53 ± 6.35SE
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".