MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sequential patterns of colonization of coarse woody debris by <i>Ips pini</i> (Say) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) following a major ice storm in Ontario

2006· article· en· W2015547085 on OpenAlexaffabout
Krista Ryall, Peter de Groot, Sandy M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural and Forest Entomology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsBiologyColonizationBark beetleSnagResistance (ecology)Mountain pine beetleCoarse woody debrisDendroctonusWoody plantBroodEcologyBark (sound)Habitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is widely known that many bark and wood‐boring beetle species use nonresistant coarse woody debris (CWD) created by disturbances; however, the ability of these secondary species to cause mortality in healthy trees following a build‐up of their populations remains unclear. We characterized the pattern of colonization by Ips pini (Say) following a major ice storm that created large amounts of CWD varying in resistance to colonization (i.e. ranging from snapped tops with no resistance to heavily damaged trees with intact root systems). A major question was how the beetles responded to the different types of storm‐damaged material and whether healthy undamaged trees were colonized and killed following increases in beetle populations. Six red pine, Pinus resinosa Ait., plantations in eastern Ontario were monitored from 1998 to 2001 inclusive: three with high storm damage (approximately 120 m 3 /ha CWD) and three with minimal damage (approximately 20 m 3 /ha CWD). Transects (200 × 2 m) were sampled yearly in each plantation to assess the type and amount of damaged pine brood material colonized by the pine engraver beetle, I. pini. Beetles preferentially infested the most nonresistant material available each year (i.e. all snapped tops in year 1, all standing snags, up‐rooted trees and many bent trees by year 2, but still less than 50% of trees blown over but with intact root systems by year 3). By years 3 and 4, the majority (approximately 75%) of severely damaged trees (with &gt; 50% crown loss) died prior to beetle colonization. The size of the beetle population tracked the abundance of available woody material from year‐to‐year within a plantation; populations were very large in the first 2 years, and declined significantly in the last 2 years. Healthy standing red pines were apparently resistant to colonization by the beetles, despite the significant build‐up in their populations. Hence, the results of the present study suggest that native bark beetle populations will not cause further tree mortality following such a disturbance in this region.

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 score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural and Forest EntomologySame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207