Effects of Pitfall Trap Lid Transparency and Habitat Structure on the Catches of Carabid Beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) in Tame Pasture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Captures of insects in pitfall traps are affected by features of trap design that may confound the interpretation of data. One such feature is a lid suspended over the opening of the trap to exclude debris and rainwater. In this study, we tested whether use of these lids affected captures of carabid beetles by altering the light conditions at the opening to the trap. In one experiment, we examined the effects of lid transparency (opaque, semitransparent, or transparent) on catch rates. In a second experiment, we manipulated the heights (high, medium, or low) of vegetation adjacent to the traps to test for lid transparency and vegetation height interactions. We found that significantly more carabids were captured with use of transparent lids compared with other lid transparencies. Fewest Agonum cupreum Dejean, 1831, were captured with use of opaque lids. No other effects were detected. Given these results, we advocate the use of transparent lids, which provide the benefits of traditional opaque lids while minimizing the effects of lid use on light conditions at the opening to the trap.
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".