MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of resin flow and monoterpene composition on susceptibility of lodgepole pine to attack by the Douglas‐fir pitch moth, <i>Synanthedon novaroensis</i> (Lep., Sesiidae)

2000· article· en· W2114048523 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Entomology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Pheromone Research and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMonoterpeneLimoneneBotanyHorticultureLepidoptera genitaliaSeed orchardEssential oil

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resin flow differed significantly among three of six clones of lodgepole pine seed orchard trees, but did not differ among the clones categorized as susceptible or resistant to attack by the Douglas‐fir pitch moth. A stepwise regression analysis identified δ‐3‐carene, cyclohexene, and α‐terpinolene as significant compounds, explaining 49.9% of the variation in the number of attacks per tree. δ‐3‐Carene alone explained 41.8% of the variation in the regression, and analysis of variance showed that resistant clones consistently had high relative amounts (&gt;17.9%) of this compound, whereas susceptible clones had low amounts (&lt;10%). The significant effect by cyclohexene and α‐terpinolene in the stepwise regression appeared to be due to a correlation between α‐terpinolene and δ‐3‐carene in several clones, and that cyclohexene was only present in one clone, rather than any discernable biological relationship. Limonene co‐eluted with β‐phellandrene, so its role must be determined by additional study.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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