MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012352004 · doi:10.1080/03014220809510552

Studies of life history and some aspects of field biology and ecology of <i>Nysius huttoni</i> White (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae)

2008· article· en· W2012352004 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yong Jiang Wei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNipissing UniversityUniversity of Canterbury
KeywordsLygaeidaeOverwinteringHemipteraBiologyEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Detailed field studies of the biology and ecology of Nysius huttoni were undertaken over 4 years in Canterbury, New Zealand. This study establishes beyond doubt that there are three generations a year, with generations overlapping between the first and second, and the second and third generations. Nysius huttoni overwinters as adults of the third (autumn) generation. Adults go into overwintering from mid April to early May and emerge from overwintering sites in late August or early September. The first generation (from newly laid egg to emergence of adult) completed development in a range of 55–65 days over the 4 years, and the second and third generations in ranges of 35–50 and 20–60 days, respectively. The period of occurrence for the first generation ranged from 120 to 135 days over the 4 years, and for the second and third generations ranged from 80 to 120 and 285 to 295 days, respectively. Each generation showed a distinct seasonal peak and pattern in mating and oviposition; the third‐generation adults that emerge before winter mate and oviposit in spring after overwintering. The present results will be useful in predicting the field development and occurrence of N. huttoni in Canterbury.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Society of New ZealandSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207