Temporal and spatial variability of rosy apple aphid <i>Dysaphis plantaginea</i> populations: is there a role of the alternate host plant <i>Plantago major</i> ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rosy apple aphid Dysaphis plantaginea (Passerini) (Homoptera: Aphididae) is a pest of economic importance to the apple industry worldwide, particularly in organic apple orchards where no acceptable controls are available. In the Similkameen Valley of British Columbia, Canada, the rosy apple aphid population size varies widely between orchards and between years. To explain this variation, potential environmental correlates of aphid density were evaluated. The architecture of the alternate host was also evaluated for its effect on rosy apple aphid summer survival and reproduction. The percentage of trees infested by rosy apple aphids among orchards was in the range 8–94% for trees having at least one cluster with more than ten aphids in 2007 and in the range 0–39% in 2008. A general linear model correlating aphid densities to the environmental variables of abundance of the alternate host (plantain Plantago spp.), foliar nitrogen, tree age and planting density, and reduced by stepwise regression, indicated that foliar nitrogen and tree age explained 33% of the variation. Abundance of the summer, alternate food plant, plantain, was not related to later aphid densities on apple trees. Plantain architecture, however, influenced aphid numbers and 25‐fold more aphids were found on low‐lying plantain leaves than on more upright leaves. Experimental manipulation of leaf angle and leaf size showed that significantly more aphids occurred on low angle, large leaves. Finally, mowing that encouraged low lying plants prior to spring aphid migration was associated with a four‐fold greater number of both winged and wingless aphids on the plantain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".