MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170500954 · doi:10.4039/n06-054

Predicting the seasonal development of the yellowheaded spruce sawfly (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae) in eastern Canada

2007· article· en· W2170500954 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jacques Régnière, Dan Lavigne, Alain Dupont, Nelson Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsGovernment of New BrunswickNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersMinnesota Department of Natural Resources
KeywordsSawflyTenthredinidaeBlack spruceInstarLarvaPheromone trapBiologyPhenologyHymenopteraPupaPheromoneZoologyEcologyTaiga

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Degree-day phenology models for the yellowheaded spruce sawfly,Pikonema alaskensis(Rohwer), were developed from data sets collected in infested plantations of black spruce,Picea mariana(Mill.), and white spruce,P. glauca(Moench) Voss, in New Brunswick and Quebec, Canada, between 1995 and 1999. The models describe the relationships between degree-day accumulation (above −1 °C, from 1 April) and cumulative adult emergence, capture in pheromone traps, the dates of appearance of first adult, egg, and larva, and the relative frequency of successive larval stages. The models predict adult emergence with a precision of ±2 days and male catch in pheromone traps with a precision of ±1.6 days. The first adult, first egg, and first larva occurred after 527 ± 42, 660 ± 52, and 725 ± 18 degree-days above –1 °C, respectively, and the dates of these events are predicted within ±1.8 days. The dates of 50% occurrence of the successive instars are predicted within 4.5 days of observed dates, and the date of peak 2nd instar is predicted within ±3.6 days.

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)0.001
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207