MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993005799 · doi:10.1155/2012/746342

The Influence of Abiotic Factors on an Invasive Pest of Pulse Crops,<i>Sitona lineatus</i>(L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), in North America

2012· article· en· W1993005799 on OpenAlexaffabout
O. Olfert, R.M. Weiss, Héctor A. Cárcamo, Scott Meers

Bibliographic record

VenuePsyche A Journal of Entomology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurculionidaeWeevilPEST analysisAbiotic componentPhenologyEcologyClimate changeRange (aeronautics)BiologyGeographyAgroforestryAgronomyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pea leaf weevil, Sitona lineatus (L.), native to Europe and North Africa, has been introduced into many other countries around the world, including the USA and Canada. Adults are oligophagous pests on leguminaceous plants. Sitona lineatus was first recorded in Canada in 1997, near Lethbridge, Alberta. Since then, it has spread north in Alberta and west into Saskatchewan in 2007. Bioclimatic simulation models were used to predict the distribution and extent of establishment of S. lineatus in Canada based on its current geographic range, phenology, relative abundance, and empirical data. The study identified areas in Canada that are at risk for future establishment of S. lineatus and developed a better understanding of climate effects. Climate change projections (General Circulation Models) were then imposed on the bioclimatic model of S. lineatus . Bioclimatic model output varied for each of the three General Circulation Models. In terms of suitability for pest establishment (Ecoclimatic Index), the NCAR273 CCSM climate data resulted in the most significant shift northward.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsyche A Journal of EntomologySame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207