MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Host‐use patterns of saproxylic phloeophagous and xylophagous Coleoptera adults and larvae along the decay gradient in standing dead black spruce and aspen

2007· article· en· W2033234680 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Michel Saint‐Germain, Pierre Drapeau, Christopher M. Buddle

Bibliographic record

VenueEcography · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsSnagLonghorn beetleFrassBiologyEcologyHost (biology)DeciduousLarvaCurculionidaeBark (sound)TaigaBlack spruceForest ecologyEcosystemHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood‐feeding insects play important functional roles in forest ecosystems, contributing significantly to wood decay processes. However, sampling these species in a direct and quantitative way is difficult because they live most of their lives as larvae deep into the wood; knowledge of species‐specific host‐use patterns along the decay gradient is thus lacking in this group. To cope with these difficulties, we used a novel approach, snag dissection, to investigate occurrence patterns of such Coleoptera adults and larvae. We selected 80 snags of both black spruce and aspen along four classes of decay in five different stands distributed over the tree species’ ranges within the province of Quebec, Canada, and dissected a one‐meter section of each. All adults and larvae of Buprestidae, Cerambycidae and Scolytinae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) were collected and identified to the lowest taxonomical level possible. Wood density and snag age were also calculated for each sampled snag. In black spruce, host‐use was mostly concentrated at the beginning of the decay gradient. Patterns observed in aspen were opposite, as few insects were found in fresh snags, while most snags in middle to late stages of decay contained insects, often in large numbers, in some reaching densities of over 1000 cerambycid larvae m −3 . For both tree species, patterns observed were similar across regions sampled. Differences in host‐use patterns between the coniferous and deciduous host species may be due to differences in secondary chemistry, mechanical defence mechanisms or the stand dynamics typically associated with each tree 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations125
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcographySame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207