Association of tree diameter with body size and lipid content of mountain pine beetles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Host tree diameter is considered an important predictor of the population dynamics of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae), but the relationship between host tree diameter and beetle traits is unclear. The primary objective of this study was to determine how the quality of individual mountain pine beetles, measured as body size (pronotum width) and lipid content, varied with the diameter of lodgepole pine trees, Pinus contorta var. latifolia Engelmann (Pinaceae). Naturally attacked trees, ranging in diameter from 10 to 35 cm, were selected from stands near Prince George, British Columbia, Canada. Colonisation density and pupal density generally increased with tree diameter, but the number of pupal chambers per gallery start remained constant. Tree diameter positively affected beetle body size, which in turn was positively correlated with absolute lipid content in both sexes and relative lipid content in males. However, tree diameter did not directly predict absolute lipid content, and relative lipid content decreased with tree diameter in males. Larger beetles emerged earlier in the emergence period with relative lipid content remaining constant throughout emergence. All relationships had considerable unexplained variation. Thus, the use of tree diameter or emergence time as predictors of population dynamics of mountain pine beetles should be done with caution.
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".