MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124271411 · doi:10.1897/03-88

Responses of nontarget lepidoptera to foray 48B® <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i> var. <i>kurstaki</i> on Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada

2004· article· en· W2124271411 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Timothy J. Boulton

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLepidoptera genitaliaLymantria disparBacillus thuringiensisBiologyGypsy mothAbundance (ecology)PEST analysisDisparBotanyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impacts of a gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) eradication program on native, nontarget Lepidoptera were assessed in 1999, on southeastern Vancouver Island (BC, Canada). The microbial insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki (Btk) was applied aerially over two areas totalling 12,805 ha on May 8, May 19, and June 8, 1999, at a dosage of 50 billion international units in 4.0 L/ha. Lepidoptera were collected from two host plant species: Garry oak (Quercus garryana) and common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus). Lepidopteran larvae were collected from common snowberry foliage at 24 urban parks and from Garry oak foliage at 28 oak-dominated habitats, representing 12 and 14 replicates, respectively, of two treatments: unsprayed (reference) and sprayed (treatment). Prespray data were collected from March 25 to May 6 for S. albus, and from April 26 to May 6 for Q. garryana. Postspray data were collected from May 10 through June 15 for S. albus and from May 10 to July 6 for Q. garryana. The 15 most abundant lepidopteran species were analyzed statistically. However, the majority of species were collected infrequently, and, therefore were pooled for statistical analysis. After the Btk spray applications, 11 of the individual species and groups of uncommon species were found to be significantly less abundant in the treatment sites than in the reference sites. The effects of sample date were statistically significant on almost all groups of Lepidoptera analyzed, both before and after Btk spray applications, indicating temporal variation in lepidopteran abundance. Significant variation in diversity of members of the Lepidoptera, as a result of Btk spray application, was not detected on S. albus or Q. garryana. However, results showed significant variation in lepidoptera richness and abundance on both host plant species.

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)0.000
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 score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicInsect Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207