Ecological factors influencing diapause in the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.). (Tortricidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigations were carried out to determine the effect of ecological factors on the induction of diapause in the spruce budworm. Experimental rearings were conducted at elevations of 2500, 4200 and 4750 feet. The foliage of spruce, Douglas fir and alpine fir were used as hosts. Progeny of Ontario, two-year and one-year types reared under one-year and two-year life cycle conditions were used as experimental insects. A trend was observed in emergence from hibernation with the one-year type leading, followed by the two-year and finally the Ontario type. It was shown that the one-year type larvae may adopt the two-year habit. The main factor influencing this is a prolonged development period for the parents. The larvae reared at the higher elevations showed a greater proportion entering diapause. Food played a smaller role with spruce and Douglas fir being more favourable for diapause than alpine fir. The increased percentage of larvae in diapause in 1952 is attributed to a longer development period for their parents and to a sharp drop in temperature occurring about 12 days prior to diapause. The Ontario material may adopt the two-year habit. The factors contributing to this have not been clearly shown as the rearing results are inconclusive. There were no definite differences shown in the time for development among the three foods. The insects at the lowest station developed in approximately three weeks less time than at the highest. The difference between the upper stations was slight. The impracticability of converting a one-year life cycle population to a two-year cycle by forest management is noted. The diapause theories of Wigglesworth and Andrewartha are commented on. A possible course of evolution leading to the establishment of a two-year life cycle population is given.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".