Host Volatile Attractants and Traps for Detection of<i>Tetropium fuscum</i>(F.),<i>Tetropium castaneum</i>L., and Other Longhorned Beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cortical and sapwood volatiles were collected in situ from red spruce, Picea rubens (Sarg.), trees infested with Tetropium fuscum (F.), to determine the relative concentrations and enantiomer ratios of monoterpenes emitted. This information was used to create a synthetic “spruce blend” lure that was tested in various trap designs for efficacy in capturing T. fuscum, and Tetropium castaneum L. in field bioassays conducted on McNabs Island, Nova Scotia, in 2001 and 2002 and in Poland and Switzerland in 2002. Response of other cerambycid species was measured opportunistically. Cross-vane pan traps baited with spruce blend caught significantly more T. fuscum than unbaited traps or traps baited with racemic -pinene, ethanol, or both. The addition of an ethanol lure to spruce blend–baited traps significantly increased capture of T. fuscum and T. castaneum. There were no significant differences among trap designs in mean catch of either Tetropium species. Spruce blend was also significantly attractive to Monochamus urussovii (Fischer) and, when paired with an ethanol lure, was significantly attractive to Spondylis buprestoides L. Asemum striatum L. was significantly attracted to racemic -pinene but was not attracted to spruce blend or spruce blend plus ethanol. None of the lures tested were significantly attractive to Stictoleptura rubra L. or Alosterna tabacicolor (DeGeer).
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it