Community Composition of Longhorned Beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in the Canopy and Understorey of Sugar Maple and White Pine Stands in South-Central Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insects of forest canopies are poorly known, especially in temperate forests of eastern North America. From June to August 2001, we sampled Cerambycidae using paired canopy and understorey flight-interception traps in nine pine and nine maple sites in south-central Ontario. Canopy traps were set using a simple ground-based bow-and-arrow method, and averaged 24.5 m in height at pine sites and 20.5 m at maple sites. In total, 297 individuals from 28 species were collected during 6 wk of sampling. Clytus ruricola (Olivier) accounted for 37% of all individuals. Pine sites had more species and higher expected richness than maple sites but significantly fewer individuals. Ten species were unique to pine, six to maple, and 12 occurred in both forest types. The two trap heights had similar observed richness, but expected richness was higher for canopy than understorey traps. Understorey traps accumulated significantly higher abundances than canopy traps. Eleven species were unique to canopy traps, 11 to understorey traps, and six occurred at both heights. Species accumulation was much faster when both heights were sampled compared with either alone. Anthophylax attenuatus (Newman), which has been rarely caught in other studies, was collected only in the canopy and was relatively abundant. Top collecting bottles on traps yielded similar observed richness as bottom bottles but had higher expected richness. Several species showed strong associations with either top or bottom collecting bottles. Species accumulation rates appeared to be higher than in other studies. Our results emphasize the necessity of including the canopy fauna in diversity studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".