Diel activity patterns of <i>Paradiplosis tumifex</i> (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) and its inquiline, <i>Dasineura balsamicola</i> (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae), within young balsam fir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Field studies were carried out to assess diel activity patterns of the balsam gall midge, Paradiplosis tumifex Gagné (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) in 2012, and its inquiline, Dasineura balsamicola (Lintner) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) in 2013, in a young balsam fir (Abies balsamea (Linnaeus) Miller) stand in New Brunswick, Canada. Both gallmaker and inquiline are most active during the afternoon/evening hours (17:00–22:00 hours). Male gallmaker activity was largely confined to the space below the crown and typically involved short periods of flight of <30 seconds. Calling and mating by the gallmaker occurred at ground level and were followed by dispersal of females to the vegetative crown. Female gallmakers were typically observed in the tree crown beginning in early afternoon, with peak oviposition occurring between 20:00 and 21:00 hours. Female inquilines displayed similar activity patterns, although no calling or mating were observed. Moreover, inquiline flight and foraging for oviposition sites were more active than the gallmaker, with shorter rest periods and more buds visited than the gallmaker. Our results indicate that population monitoring should focus on female gallmakers as they fly during the evening. Also, before any treatment application, care should be taken to accurately identify the insects to ensure that the inquiline is not inadvertently killed.
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 | 0.001 | 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".