Are bumble bee colonies in tomato greenhouses obtaining adequate nutrition?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Managed bumble bees are important pollinators of greenhouse crops, but few studies have examined factors that affect the health and productivity of commercially produced colonies. We investigated whether supplemental feeding with diverse pollens affected worker longevity and colony size of Bombus occidentalis Greene (Hymenoptera: Apidae) colonies in tomato (Solanaceae) greenhouses. We found no differences in colony worker populations, brood production, or queen and drone production between supplemented and nonsupplemented treatments, suggesting that B. occidentalis colonies obtain adequate nutrition from the tomato pollen available in greenhouses. Adult populations did not increase in any treatment, but either remained stable or declined after colonies were placed in greenhouses. Because brood-rearing increased in all treatments but adult populations did not, adult mortality due to a non-nutritional factor such as disease or disorientation appears to be an important problem limiting the size of bumble bee colonies, and thus the effectiveness of bumble bees for greenhouse tomato pollination.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".