Alfalfa leafcutting bee (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) pollination of oilseed rape (<i>Brassica napus</i> L.) under isolation tents for hybrid seed production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this 3-yr field study, the activities of alfalfa leafcutting bees (Megachile rotundata Fabricius) (LCB) at varying stocking levels were monitored in shade cloth isolation tents containing male-sterile and male-fertile rows of oilseed rape Brassica napus L. to determine optimum conditions for hybrid seed production. Bumble bees, Bombus impatiens Cresson, were similarly tested in 1 yr; their pollination activities were minimal, and weight of seed produced on female lines in tents containing bumble bees was similar to that in tents without pollinators. Leafcutting bee activity, as measured by the number of female bees at the entrance to tunnels in the hive, at first increased, then decreased with increasing stocking rate. Duration of time spent visiting flowers did not vary with stocking rate, but was longer on male-fertile than on male-sterile flowers. Production of hybrid seed within tents varied with leafcutting bee stocking rate, with the highest seed yield achieved at stocking rates equivalent to three charges at weekly intervals of 400 000 leafcutting bees per hectare. At optimum LCB stocking rates, the method described provided sufficient seed quantity for small-plot multi-location field evaluation of oilseed rape hybrids. Key words: Megachile rotundata, alfalfa leafcutting bee, Bombus impatiens, Brassica napus, oilseed rape, hybrid seed production, isolation tents
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".