MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Potential distribution and relative abundance of swede midge, <i>Contarinia nasturtii</i>, an invasive pest in Canada

2006· article· en· W2130501879 on OpenAlexaffabout
O. Olfert, Rebecca H. Hallett, R.M. Weiss, Juliana J. Soroka, Sheila A. Goodfellow

Bibliographic record

VenueEntomologia Experimentalis et Applicata · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCecidomyiidaeMidgeBiologyPEST analysisAgronomyEcologyBotanyLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The swede midge, Contarinia nasturtii (Kieffer) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae), is a pest of most cultivated Brassicaceae such as broccoli, canola, cauliflower, cabbage, and Brussels sprouts. The species primarily has a Palaearctic distribution and occurs throughout Europe and southwestern Asia to the Caucasus. Between 1996 and 1999, producers of cruciferous vegetables in Ontario, Canada, reported crop damage that was consistent with damage symptoms characteristic of C. nasturtii feeding and in 2000, field studies confirmed that this damage was caused by C. nasturtii . A bioclimatic model was developed to predict potential range and relative abundance of C. nasturtii in Canada in order to determine the impact of the establishment and spread of C. nasturtii populations. Model output indicated that C. nasturtii could potentially become established in all provinces of Canada, with the risk being greatest in southwestern British Columbia, southern Ontario and Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island. Results indicated that C. nasturtii population growth in the Prairie Ecozone of western Canada would be greatest in years with above average precipitation.

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 score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations46
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntomologia Experimentalis et ApplicataSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207