MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999449301 · doi:10.1603/0022-0493-94.2.462

Bumble Bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) Activity and Pollination Levels in Commercial Tomato Greenhouses

2001· article· en· W1999449301 on OpenAlexafffund
Lora A. Morandin, Terence M. Laverty, Peter G. Kevan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Entomology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of GuelphSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsApidaeHymenopteraPollinationBiologyLibrary scienceEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commercial greenhouse studies were conducted to assess levels of pollination of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) flowers in relation to bumble bee (Bombus impatiens Cresson) colony activity and colony densities. For the assessment of pollination levels of tomato flowers, five categories were defined based on bruising levels caused by bumble bee pollination. Colony activity was measured as bee trips per ha/d using electric powered photodiode monitors inserted into the hive entrance. Levels of pollination were positively correlated with bee activity levels, up to a mean of approximately 400 pollen grains per stigma per day, after which greater activity did not result in further increases in daily pollination levels. Densities of colonies in the commercial greenhouses studied ranged from 7.6 to 19.8 colonies per hectare with a mean of 11.6 +/- 0.9. We found that an average activity of 2,000 bee trips per hectare per day was more than adequate to ensure sufficient pollination, and that this level of activity could be achieved with 7-15 colonies per hectare, depending on greenhouse conditions. Greenhouses requiring >15 colonies per hectare to achieve this level of pollination may be able to increase bee activity through alteration of greenhouse conditions. Across 50-m rows of tomato plants, levels of pollination decreased with increasing distance from bee colonies, suggesting that colonies should be evenly distributed throughout the greenhouses.

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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations132
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Economic EntomologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207