MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2176979567 · doi:10.1603/0046-225x-32.5.1115

Attraction of <I>Ips pini</I> (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) and Its Predators to Various Enantiomeric Ratios of Ipsdienol and Lanierone in California: Implications for the Augmentation and Conservation of Natural Enemies

2003· article· en· W2176979567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donald L. Dahlsten, Diana L. Six, Nadir Erbilgin, Kenneth F. Raffa, Andrew B. Lawson, David L. Rowney

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Entomology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBark beetleAttractionPredationBiologyPEST analysisSex pheromonePredatorPheromonePheromone trapBark (sound)CurculionidaeKairomoneEcologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many natural enemies of bark beetles are attracted to bark beetle pheromones, and substantial numbers of them are removed along with the target pests in mass trap-out programs. Thus, additional information on bark beetle and predator behavior is needed to maximize trap-out of target pests while decreasing trapping of beneficial insects. Ips pini (Say) is the most widespread bark beetle associated with pine trees in the United States and Canada. Geographically distant populations vary considerably in their production of, and response to, different stereoisomers of their principal pheromone component, ipsdienol, and an additional pheromone component, lanierone. California populations of I. pini are attracted to 99.9%(–)-ipsdienol, and the presence of lanierone has no effect on attraction. We simulated trap-outs by conducting no-choice assays using three different ratios of (+)/(−) enantiomers of ipsdienol with or without lanierone in the field. Experiments were performed in mixed pine forests in northern California in 1997 and 1998. Experiments were performed twice each year to sample the two major flight periods of I. pini. Ips pini and its predators showed temporal and behavioral differences in their attraction to lures. Lures that are preferred by I. pini, 3(+)/97(−) ipsdienol with or without lanierone, selectively removed up to 5–7 times more pests than predators during early summer. Moreover, the ratios of pest to predators were much higher in the late than early summer, and pest numbers were as much as 282 times higher than predators. In contrast, lures most attractive to predators removed as much as 10 predators for each I. pini trapped. These results suggest that timely applications of carefully selected synthetic lures, in combination with other complementary forest management practices, can greatly improve trap-out programs for bark beetles and natural enemy conservation. In addition, behavioral differences in attraction suggest the potential for augmentation of natural enemies.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations26
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental EntomologySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207