MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148008501 · doi:10.1139/x05-250

Interception frequency of exotic bark and ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytinae) and relationship with establishment in New Zealand and worldwide

2006· article· en· W2148008501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eckehard G. Brockerhoff, John F. Bain, Mark O. Kimberley, Miloš Knı́žek

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterceptionBark (sound)CurculionidaeBiologyIntroduced speciesInvasive speciesEcologyGeographyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scolytinae species are among the most damaging forest pests, and many of them are invasive. Over 1500 Scolytinae interceptions were recorded at New Zealand's borders between 1950 and 2000. Among the 103 species were Dendroctonus ponderosae, Ips typographus, and other high-risk species, but actual arrivals probably included many more species. Interceptions were primarily associated with dunnage, casewood (crating), and sawn timber, and originated from 59 countries, mainly from Europe, Australasia, northern Asia, and North America. New Zealand and United States interception data were highly correlated, and 7 of the 10 most intercepted species were shared. Interception frequency and establishment in New Zealand were not clearly related. By combining New Zealand and United States interceptions of true bark beetles we obtained data on species found in shipments from around the world. Logistic regression analysis showed that frequently intercepted species were about four times as likely as rarely intercepted species to be established somewhere. Interception records of wood and bark borers are valuable for the prediction of invaders and for our general understanding of invasions. The use of alternatives to solid wood packaging, such as processed wood, should be encouraged to reduce the spread of invasive wood and bark borers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations273
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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