Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) Diversity, Activity Density, and Community Structure in a Diversified Agroecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diversity and abundance of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) can be enhanced in vegetable and field intercropping systems, but the complexity of polycultures precludes the application of generalized assumptions of effects for novel intercropping combinations. In a field experiment conducted at Lacombe and Ellerslie, Alberta, Canada, in 2005 and 2006, we investigated the effects of intercropping canola (Brassica napus L.) with wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) on the diversity and community structure of carabid beetles, and on the activity density responses of individual carabid species. Shannon-Wiener diversity index scores and species evenness increased significantly as the proportion of wheat comprising total crop plant populations increased in one site-year of the study, indicating a positive response to enhanced crop plant species evenness in the intercrops, and in that same site-year, ground beetle communities in intercrops shifted to more closely approximate those in wheat monocultures as the percentage of wheat in the intercrops increased. Individual carabid species activity densities showed differing responses to intercropping, although activity densities of some potential root maggot (Delia spp.) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) predators were greater in intercrops with high proportions of wheat than in canola monocultures. The activity density of Pterostichus melanarius (Illiger), the most abundant species collected, tended to be greater in canola monocultures than high-wheat intercrops or wheat monocultures. We conclude that intercrops of canola and wheat have the potential to enhance populations of some carabid species, therefore possibly exerting increased pressure on some canola insect pests.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".