Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Dispersal of Western Flower Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in Nectarine Orchards in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thrips were sampled from six nectarine orchards in the Dry Central Interior, British Columbia, Canada, between April and June 1993 using yellow sticky cards on posts spaced around the perimeter of each orchard. Although 12 identified species of thrips were captured, >90% of individuals were the western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande). The flight patterns and abundances of western flower thrips were compared between orchards located in two differently oriented valleys (N-S and E-W) and between orchards located close to or far from areas of wild land. Results indicate that densities of western flower thrips entering orchards, and their direction of movement, were related more to the external vegetation than either location within the two different valleys or general wind flow patterns. Western flower thrips tended to move into orchards close to ground level in early spring (late April and early May) but flew higher as ground cover grew taller and temperatures increased. Densities of western flower thrips at ground level were highest in an orchard with the densest dandelion ground cover. We conclude that the location of nectarine orchards in relation to wild areas is a major determinate of western flower thrips densities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".