MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A GIS‐based approach for areawide pest management: the scales of <i>Lygus hesperus</i> movements to cotton from alfalfa, weeds, and cotton

2006· article· en· W2068925280 on OpenAlexaff
Yves Carrière, Peter C. Ellsworth, Pierre Dutilleul, Christa Ellers‐Kirk, Virginia Barkley, Larry Antilla

Bibliographic record

VenueEntomologia Experimentalis et Applicata · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHemiptera Insect Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersUniversity of ArizonaU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiological dispersalMiridaeBiologyAgronomyIntegrated pest managementPopulationPEST analysisForageLygusAgroforestryEcologyHemipteraBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding the effect of cropping patterns on population dynamics, dispersal, and habitat selection of insect pests has been an unresolved challenge. Here, we studied the western tarnished plant bug, Lygus hesperus (Knight) (Heteroptera: Miridae), in cotton during early summer in central Arizona. We used a general approach based on global positioning system (GPS) and geographic information system (GIS) technologies combined with spatial statistics to assess the maximum distance at which forage and seed alfalfa, fallow fields with weeds, and cotton affect L. hesperus population density. Using a set of 50 cotton fields as focal fields, we found that forage and seed alfalfa as well as weeds acted as L. hesperus sources for these cotton fields. The source effect did not extend beyond 375, 500, and 1500 m for forage alfalfa, weeds, and seed alfalfa, respectively. Conversely, cotton fields acted as L. hesperus sinks, but this effect did not extend further than 750 m from the focal cotton fields. These findings suggest that specific spatial arrangements of these field types could reduce L. hesperus damage to cotton. The spatially explicit approach used here provides a direct evaluation of the effects of agroecosystem heterogeneity on pest population dynamics, dispersal, and habitat selection, which is a significant asset for the development and improvement of areawide pest management.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations127
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntomologia Experimentalis et ApplicataSame topicHemiptera Insect StudiesFrench-language works237,207