Response of <i>Dryocoetes confusus</i> and <i>D. autographus</i> (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) to enantiospecific pheromone baits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In past field studies, the greatest response of western balsam bark beetles, Dryocoetes confusus Swaine, to traps was obtained with blends of (+)-exo-brevicomin and (+)- or (±)-endo-brevicomin, which imitate the natural male-produced aggregation pheromone. We conducted a trapping experiment comparing low-release enanti ospecific blends (9:1 (+)-exo-brevicomin:(+)-endo-brevicomin or 9:2 (+)-exo-brevicomin:(±)-endo-brevicomin released at 0.3, 0.1, or 0.03 mg per day) with the standard commercial (±)-exo-brevicomin bait released at 1.2 mg per day. Multiple-funnel traps baited with the experimental blends caught more D. confusus than the unbaited traps, but only traps with the 9:2 (+):(±) blend released at 0.3 and 0.03 mg per day caught significantly more male and female beetles than those baited with the standard bait. Thus, trap sensitivity can be improved with the addition of (±)-endo-brevicomin. The sympatric bark beetle D. autographus Ratzeburg was captured in significant numbers in traps baited with (±)-exo-brevicomin. A subsequent trapping experiment showed that D. autographus responded to (+)- or (±)-exo-brevicomin, but not to (−)-exo-brevicomin, suggesting that (+)-exo-brevicomin is the principal aggregation pheromone component in this species.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".