MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030626893 · doi:10.4141/p02-192

Plant-species identity of pollen collected by bumblebees placed in greenhouses for tomato pollination

2004· article· en· W2030626893 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Robin Whittington, M. L. Winston, C. L. Tucker, Amy L. Parachnowitsch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsBumblebeeGreenhousePollenPollinationBiologyForagePollinatorBombus terrestrisSolar greenhousePollen sourceForagingAgronomyBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The seasonal variation of pollen collected from different plant species by greenhouse bumblebees was investigated to determine how frequently bumblebees forage outside of commercial tomato greenhouses. Pollen was collected from bumblebees at three greenhouses between February and September 2001 and the plant species identity of pollen collected was determined with light microscopy. A significant amount of non-tomato pollen was collected by bumblebees during one or more months from outside each of the three greenhouses studied. The bees brought back as little as an average of 5% non-tomato pollen between February and September at one greenhouse and as much as 73% during July at another. Therefore, greenhouse tomato growers are probably not obtaining maximum pollination benefit from bumblebee colonies and should address methods to reduce their foraging outside the greenhouse. Key words: Bumblebee, Bombus occidentalis, Bombus impatiens, pollen, greenhouse, tomato

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 score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.211
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

Citations50
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant ScienceSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207