Seasonal Variability in Spider Assemblages in Traditional and Transgenic Rice Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of Bt transgenic rice (or Bt rice) remains controversial in several countries, including China. Risk assessments are a prerequisite to confirm the safety of Bt rice for ecosystems before a commercial release. This study was conducted to compare the responses of spider assemblages to Bt rice and nontransgenic rice. Two experiments with different locations and times were conducted, and the data were analyzed using standard diversity indices and multivariate community analysis. With both analytical approaches, spider diversity and assemblage composition were not significantly different between Bt and non transgenic rice fields. However, based on principal component analyses, temporal (seasonal) variations occurred in the composition of the spider assemblage. In this study, Bt rice had no detrimental effects on the spider assemblages, although assemblage composition and species abundance varied during the growing season. This study demonstrated an advantage in using community assemblages and repeated sampling to compare fields over a growing season because changes in the assemblages, and more specifically for some species, not always the most dominant, may vary over time. To more accurately assess the changes in composition and structure of spider assemblages through time, particularly for those species that may require a longer period to detect a response, an increase in sampling effort and longer-term experiments might be required.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".