Quantitative Association of Bark Beetles with Pitch Canker Fungus and Effects of Verbenone on Their Semiochemical Communication in Monterey Pine Forests in Northern Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The association between 11 species of bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytinae) and one weevil (Coleoptera: Entiminae) with the pitch canker fungus, Fusarium circinatum Nirenberg and O'Donnell, was determined by crushing beetles on selective medium and histone H3 gene sequencing. Pityophthorus pubescens (Marsham) (25.00%), Hylurgops palliatus (Gyllenhal) (11.96%), Ips sexdentatus (Börner) (8.57%), Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood (7.89%), Hylastes attenuatus Erichson (7.40%), and Orthotomicus erosus (Wollaston) (2.73%) were found to carry the inoculum. In addition, the root weevil Brachyderes incanus L. (14.28%) had the second highest frequency of occurrence of the fungus. The responses of the insects to a range of verbenone doses were tested in field bioassays using funnel traps. Catches of P. pubescens, a species colonizing branch tips of live trees, were significantly reduced in a log-linear dose-dependent relationship. Catches of I. sexdentatus, an opportunistic species normally attacking fresh dead host material, were also gradually reduced with increasing verbenone dose. Catches of Tomicus piniperda L., O. erosus, Dryocoetes autographus (Ratzeburg), H. eruditus, Xyleborus dryographus (Ratzeburg), Hylastes ater (Paykull), Hylurgus ligniperda (F.), H. attenuatus, and B. incanus were not significantly affected by verbenone. The effects of verbenone were consistent with differences in host-age preference. Semiochemical disruption by verbenone in P. pubescens and I. sexdentatus could represent an integrated pest management strategy for the prevention of the spread of pitch canker disease between different stands. However, several species associated with F. circinatum were unaffected by verbenone, not supporting this compound for prevention of the establishment of potential vectors in Northern Spain.
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) | 0.001 | 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".