MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136205129 · doi:10.1139/x06-048

Does aerial spraying of<i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i>subsp.<i>kurstaki</i>(Btk) pose a risk to nontarget soil microarthropods?

2006· article· en· W2136205129 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J.A. Addison, I. S. Otvos, Jeffrey P. Battigelli, Nicholas Conder

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovo Nordisk
KeywordsBacillus thuringiensisBiologyOribatidaAbundance (ecology)Bruton's tyrosine kinaseMiteSpecies richnessBotanyHorticultureEcologyAgronomyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This field study was carried out to investigate whether application of an aerial spray containing Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki (Btk) to control the western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis Freeman, 1967) had any measurable effects on aspects of the abundance, distribution, diversity, and feeding behaviour of nontarget soil microarthropods. Although total abundance and species richness (N 0 ) of Collembola declined significantly in samples taken 3 weeks after spraying, this decline occurred in the control plots as well as in plots sprayed with Btk. Values for the diversity indices N 1 and N 2 were not affected by the treatment. Correspondence analysis did not identify changes in collembolan communities following the aerial application of Btk. Total abundance of mites and populations of different suborders (Prostigmata, Mesostigmata, and Oribatida) were not significantly affected by application of Btk, or by the time of year that the samples were collected. There was no evidence of a selective reduction in the surface-dwelling portions of the collembolan and mite communities following exposure to Btk. Similarly, the experimental spray did not cause a decline in the abundance of the guild of Collembola known to feed on bacteria, and the proportion of bacteria in the diet of these Collembola following application of Btk was also unchanged.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207