Foliage architecture explains oviposition preference of spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) for white spruce over balsam fir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract I conducted dual-choice oviposition bioassays to test the hypothesis that spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens), prefer the foliage architecture (spatial arrangement of foliage needles) of white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss; Pinaceae) to that of balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) P. Mill.; Pinaceae). Needles of white spruce radiate around the twig axis, giving the foliage a round architecture. Needles of balsam fir typically radiate bilaterally from the twig axis, giving the foliage a flat architecture, although on some trees foliage needles radiate around the twig axis, giving the foliage a round architecture. In bioassays, females showed a 2.4:1 preference for white spruce over "flat" balsam fir foliage, but this preference was reduced significantly to a 1.2:1 ratio when balsam fir had a round architecture. Given a choice between "round" and "flat" balsam fir foliage, females preferred the "round" foliage by a 2.2:1 margin. A similar preference for the round architecture was also observed when artificial (plastic) foliage with the two types of needle arrangements were compared. I conclude that the spatial arrangement of foliage needles is a major factor responsible for the oviposition preference of spruce budworm for white spruce over balsam fir.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".