Seasonal and Diurnal Dynamics of Spiders (Araneae) in West Virginia Orchards and the Effect of Orchard Management on Spider Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four West Virginia apple orchards under different management (unmanaged; horticultural management only; horticultural management with apple, peach, and cherry trees interplanted; and standard commercial management) were sampled for spider abundance. Sampling was done with limb jarring at four times during the season; samples were taken hourly over a 24-h period. A total of 1,926 spiders from 15 families was collected, and 44% of all spiders were Salticidae. More spiders were collected in August (37%) than earlier months, but the highest diversity of spider families was in July. Older, unsprayed apple trees had the greatest diversity of spiders. The family Oxyopidae was most abundant in the commercially managed orchard. Spiders in the families Anyphaenidae, Philodromidae, and Thomisidae were significantly more abundant during night samples than during the day. Philodromids were also significantly more abundant on peach and cherry trees than on apple, possibly being attracted to extrafloral nectaries. Comparisons with other published data sets found that regional differences were more important determinants of spider community structure in apple than insecticide use. Northwest European, sprayed Quebec, and sprayed Washington apple orchards were found to be dominated by web-building spiders; the other North American and Israeli orchards were dominated by hunting spiders. Abundance and diversity of the spider community in orchards suggests that spiders could be major contributors to biological control of many insect pests.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".