Do Weather Conditions Correlate with Findings in Failed, Provision-Filled Nest Cells of <I>Megachile rotundata</I> (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) in Western North America?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cavity-nesting alfalfa leafcutting bees, Megachile rotundata (F.) (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae), are excellent pollinators of alfalfa, Medicago savita L., for seed production. In commercial settings, artificial cavities are placed in field domiciles for nesting and, thereby, bee populations are sustained for future use. For this study, cells from leafcutting bee nests were collected in late summer from commercial seed fields. Over 3 yr (2003-2005), 39 samples in total of approximately equal to 1,000 cells each were taken from several northwestern U.S. states and from Manitoba, Canada. X-radiography of 500 cells from each sample was used to identify "pollen balls" (i.e., cells in which the pollen-nectar provision remained, but the egg or larva, if present, was not detectable on an x-radiograph). Most U.S. samples seemed to have higher proportions of pollen ball cells than Manitoba samples. Pollen ball cells were dissected to determine the moisture condition of the mass provision and true contents of each cell. Most pollen ball cells from Manitoba samples contained fungus, the frequency of which was positively correlated with cool, wet weather. In the United States, most pollen ball cells had moist provisions, and many of them lacked young brood. Correlation analysis revealed that pollen ball cells occurred in greater proportions in fields with more hot days (above 38 degrees C). Broodless pollen ball cells occurred in greater proportions under cool conditions, but dead small larvae (second-third instars) seemed to occur in greater proportions under hot conditions. Pollen ball cells with unhatched eggs and first instars (in the chorion) occurred in lesser proportions under hot conditions.
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) | 0.001 | 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".