Prevalence of baculoviruses in spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) populations in New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Outbreak and declining populations of spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.)) were sampled extensively at three locations in New Brunswick, Canada, between 1982 and 1992 and were examined for the prevalence of granulosis and nuclear polyhedrosis viruses (Baculoviridae). Larvae, pupae, and adults were collected using a variety of methods. Spruce budworm nuclear polyhedrosis virus (CfMNPV) genomic DNA probes and wet-mount light microscopy were used to determine CfMNPV prevalence in 50 274 juvenile spruce budworms. Spruce budworm granulosis virus (ChfuGV) genomic DNA probes were used to determine the prevalence of ChfuGV in 25 703 of these same samples. The prevalence of both viruses was low, with ChfuGV and CfMNPV not found in more than 15% and 2%, respectively, of samples in any collection in a given year. Prevalence of ChfuGV was greatest in mid- to late June in sixth-instar larvae. Each virus was detected in only two of 2177 female moths and in none of the 420 male moths examined. In the entire collection, cytoplasmic polyhedrosis virus (Reoviridae) was detected in only two budworm larvae and entomopoxvirus (Poxviridae) was not detected in any.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".