MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170952703 · doi:10.1139/b2012-095

Biophysical characteristics of the stem and petiole surface of six hemlock (<i>Tsuga</i>) species and a hybrid: implications for resistance to <i>Adelges tsugae</i>

2012· article· en· W2170952703 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kelly L F Oten, Gary R. Bauchan, John Frampton, Fred P. Hain

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorthern Research StationU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsTsugaBiologyBotanyTrichomeHost (biology)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characteristics of the plant surface significantly affect host-plant selection by phytophagous insects. Surface morphology of six hemlock species (Tsuga spp.) and a hybrid was investigated using low-temperature scanning electron microscopy. Observations focused on trichome presence and placement and cuticle thickness. These characteristics were studied in the context of species-level host-plant resistance to the hemlock woolly adelgid, Adelges tsugae Annand (Hemiptera: Adelgidae), an exotic insect causing massive mortality to eastern hemlocks (Tsuga canadensis (L.) Carr.) and Carolina hemlock (Tsuga caroliniana Engelm.) in the eastern United States. Hemlocks in the native range of the insect do not succumb to infestations and the mechanism of resistance is unknown. We addressed the potential role of plant surface morphology in the adelgid–hemlock interaction by comparing four adelgid-resistant hemlock species and a hybrid with the two adelgid-susceptible hemlock species. We found that trichomes are likely not involved in conferring resistance to A. tsugae. Cuticle thickness may be involved in insertion site selection by A. tsugae and may therefore have implications for resistance. The cuticle is thinnest at the point of A. tsugae stylet insertion and thus may affect A. tsugae feeding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207