Biodiversity of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in Canadian agricultural soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, ground beetles (Carabidae) are abundant and diverse in agricultural ecosystems. Adults of all species are well characterized, but only 10% are known in the immature stages. In a typical agricultural site, one could find 40 to 60 species. While the ground beetle species composition consists mainly of native species in agriculture sites in the Prairie regions, a mixture of local and accidentally introduced species is the norm elsewhere. Although the diversity of introduced European species is not as great as that of native of ground beetles, the absolute number of European species may dominate an agricultural site. The basic biology and habitat requirements of almost all species occurring in agricultural habitats are known. Each species of beetle has special requirements based on soil type, moisture, pH, and light exposure. They are excellent indicators of habitat modification and of the quality of the environment. Although, most species of ground beetles are predators or scavengers, some are seed feeders. Because of their positive contribution to agricultural ecosystems, maintaining and developing their diversity by providing refuge habitats is recommended. Cropping sequence and type of crop influence ground beetle populations. More important, pesticides of all kinds reduce to various degrees the number of species and specimens. Female fecundity is a most sensitive test of sublethal pesticide effects on groun d beetles and should be considered in future studies of non-target insects. Key words: Ground beetles, carabidae, diversity, ground beetles and agriculture, ground beetles and pesticides, ground beetle extirpation
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".