MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177262074

Emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), in China: a review and distribution survey.

2004· review· en· W2177262074 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wei Xia, Dick Reardon, Yuping Wu, Jianghua Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Entomologica Sinica · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgrilusEmerald ash borerBuprestidaeFraxinusGeographyChinaPEST analysisEcologyInfestationBiologyForestryAgroforestryBotanyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerald ash borer (EAB), Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), is an exotic forest pest recently discovered in North America, with the infestation centered in Michigan (United States) and Ontario (Canada). A recent pest risk assessment concluded that this new pest could spread throughout the range of ash trees in North America, and pose a serious threat to all 16 species of ash growing in the region. Many ash species are important as timber, ornamental species, and as a source of food for wildlife. This beetle is native to Asia, including China, Japan, Korea, and the Russian Far East. We conducted a literature review on the distribution of this beetle in China and other Asian countries, and preliminary field surveys on its distribution and damage in the northeastern provinces of China. These reviews revealed that this beetle is present in Heilongjiang, Liaoning and Jilin provinces. EAB has also been reported in Tianjin city, Shandong and Hebei provinces, and Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia autonomous regions in China, but its distribution is not uniform, occurring mainly on a stand-by-stand basis. Information on biology and ecology of this beetle is very limited. Several ash species in the genus Fraxinus in China were attacked.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations77
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Entomologica SinicaSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207