MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Attack by <i>Hylobius warreni</i> on grafted lodgepole pine and its relationships with monoterpene composition and scion : rootstock diameter ratio

2006· article· en· W2031984129 on OpenAlexafffund
Linnea Duke, B. Staffan Lindgren

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural and Forest Entomology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRootstockMonoterpeneBiologyBotanyHorticultureWeevilComposition (language)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract 1 A lodgepole pine seed orchard at the Prince George Tree Improvement Station (PGTIS), with up to 60% of grafted trees attacked by the Warren root collar weevil Hylobius warreni was investigated to determine whether relative monoterpene composition or scion : rootstock interactions of grafts affected susceptibility to attack. 2 There was a significant relationship between relative levels of α‐pinene, β‐thujene, β‐pinene, δ‐3‐carene and limonene in scion and rootstock in unattacked trees, indicating a potential effect of the scion monoterpene composition on their composition in the rootstock. 3 Relative content of δ‐3‐carene and β‐phellandrene differed significantly in root stocks of attacked and unattacked trees but, for individual clones, a significant difference was only detected for β‐phellandrene in one clone. δ‐3‐Carene levels may have been too low in the examined trees to exert a strong effect. 4 Interestingly, attack status was significantly associated with two scion monoterpenes: α‐thujene and α‐terpinolene, both of which had higher levels in unattacked than in attacked trees. 5 Warren root collar weevils appear largely unaffected by monoterpene content, but further study is required to determine whether high levels of δ‐3‐carene imparts some level of resistance to attack, and to verify whether the observed effects of scion monoterpenes are real or artefacts of the analysis. 6 Hylobius warreni ‐attacked trees had smaller scion : rootstock diameter ratio (i.e. a large rootstock diameter relative to the scion diameter) than unattacked trees. This effect was consistent among clones, and was not due to the absolute diameter of the rootstock or the scion. Trees with increased diameter‐growth at the root collar (e.g. some grafted trees) may have increased susceptibility to attack by H. warreni , or diameter‐growth at the root collar is affected by the attack.

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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural and Forest EntomologySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207