Goldspotted oak borer effects on tree health and colonization patterns at six newly‐established sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Newly‐established populations of invasive wood‐inhabiting insects provide an opportunity for the study of invasion dynamics and for collecting information to improve management options for these cryptic species. From 2011 to 2013, we studied the dynamics of the goldspotted oak borer A grilus auroguttatus S chaeffer ( C oleoptera: B uprestidae), a new pest of oaks in southern C alifornia, at six sites that had been colonized recently. At all sites, the percentage of coast live oaks Q uercus agrifolia N ée, colonized by A . auroguttatus increased between 2011 (6–33%) and 2013 (23–40%), although beetle densities did not grow rapidly at most sites. From 2011 to 2013, there were minor changes in signs and symptoms of A . auroguttatus infestation (adult emergence holes, bark staining, and evidence of woodpecker foraging), except at one site where an outbreak occurred. At some sites, noticeable negative changes in oak crown health occurred 1 year prior to positive A . auroguttatus population growth. Among sites, most of the A . auroguttatus population density (66–93%) was produced by a small number of heavily‐infested trees (= brood trees). Early identification and removal of brood trees in newly‐invaded areas could slow the growth of A . auroguttatus populations.
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".