MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123936694 · doi:10.1139/x10-201

Simulating the effectiveness of three potential management options to slow the spread of emerald ash borer (<i>Agrilus planipennis</i>) populations in localized outlier sites

2011· article· en· W2123936694 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rodrigo J. Mercader, Nathan W. Siegert, Andrew M. Liebhold, Deborah G. McCullough

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceMichigan State UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsEmerald ash borerAgrilusBuprestidaeFraxinusBiologyGirdlingPopulationPhloemBotanyAgronomyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), is a devastating, invasive insect pest of ash trees, Fraxinus spp., in North America. Using a simulation model, we evaluated three potential management options to slow the spread of A. planipennis in discrete outlier sites: (i) removing ash trees to reduce available host phloem resource, (ii) girdling ash trees to attract ovipositing female beetles and destroying the trees before larvae complete development, and (iii) applying a highly effective systemic insecticide. Simulations indicate that systemic insecticide applications provided the greatest reduction in the radial spread of A. planipennis. In simulations in which management options were applied only within a 300 m radius from the origin of the infestation, insecticide applications reduced the radial spread by 30% and larval consumption of ash phloem by 40% beyond the treated area. In contrast, girdling ash trees reduced the radial spread by 15% and larval consumption of ash phloem by 20% beyond the treated area. Both of these management options significantly reduced the spread of A. planipennis when treatments were applied 1 to 4 years after infestations were initiated. Reducing ash phloem by removing ash trees decreased population size within treated areas but did not reduce the radial spread, population size, or larval consumption of ash phloem beyond treated areas.

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 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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations73
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207