Distribution and abundance of <i>Cryptorhynchus lapathi</i> on <i>Salix</i> spp. in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Larvae of the poplar and willow borer, Cryptorhynchus lapathi (L.), an exotic Eurasian weevil, bore into the stems of Salix and Populus spp. creating infection courts for pathogens and weakening stems to breakage. We conducted a survey to determine the distribution and prevalence of C. lapathi in British Columbia. The survey spanned five biogeoclimatic zones, 15 subzones, 45 locations, 135 sites, and 3360 trees. We found the still-expanding range of C. lapathi to have at least doubled since 1963. The weevil was present in 38 locations and 14 subzones, with prevalence of weevil-attacked trees significantly lower in cold than in warm subzones. A regression model based on number of months with mean temperature >10°C reliably described the proportions of attacked trees in the 15 subzones (r2 = 0.81) and predicts that [Formula: see text] 25% of willows in 58.1% of British Columbia could ultimately be infested. The number of individual weevils per tree and per stem and the intensity of attack were positively and either exponentially (per tree and per stem) or logistically (intensity of attack) related to the prevalence of attacked trees (r2 = 0.41, 0.36, and 0.75, respectively). As the prevalence and intensity of attack by C. lapathi in British Columbia increase, so may the ecological and economic impact of the weevil.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".