MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149826540 · doi:10.1614/ws-d-15-00080.1

Depth of Seed Burial and Gender Influence Weed Seed Predation by Three Species of Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae)

2015· article· en· W2149826540 on OpenAlexafffund
Sharavari S. Kulkarni, Lloyd M. Dosdall, John R. Spence, Christian J. Willenborg

Bibliographic record

VenueWeed Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Canola Producers CommissionCanola Council of Canada
KeywordsWeedPredationGround beetleSeed predationTillageBiologyAgronomyBurrowCanolaGerminationHabitatEcologySeed dispersalPopulationBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ground beetles are postdispersal weed seed predators, yet their role in consuming buried seeds is not well studied. We conducted greenhouse experiments to investigate how seed burial affects consumption of weed seeds (volunteer canola) by adult ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Seed burial depth influenced seed consumption rates as demonstrated by a significant interaction between seed burial depth, carabid species, and gender of the carabid tested. We observed higher seed consumption by females of all species, and greater consumption of seeds scattered on the soil surface compared with seeds buried at any depth. However, there was evidence of seed consumption at all depths. Adults ofPterostichus melanarius(Illiger) andHarpalus affinis(Schrank) consumed more buried seeds than did those ofAmara littoralisMannerheim. Agricultural practices, such as tillage, bury seeds at different depths and based on the results of this study, these practices may reduce seed consumption by carabids. Soil conservation practices that reduce tillage (conservation or zero tillage) will favor greater weed seed predation due, in part, to the high availability of seeds at the soil surface or at shallow soil depths.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWeed ScienceSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207