Flight Period of Mountain Pine Beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in its Recently Expanded Range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to predict key phenological events, such as the timing of flight periods, is useful for the monitoring and management of insect pests. We used empirical data to describe the flight period of mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins, in its recently expanded range east of the Rocky Mountains in Canada and developed a degree-day model based on the number of trapped beetles. Data were collected over four degrees of latitude and six years. The main flight period, when the middle 70% of the total number of beetles were caught, started during the second or third week of July, lasted 26 d, and peaked within 2 wk of starting. The best model accounted for 89% of the variation in the data. Mountain pine beetle's flight tended to start later and be more contracted at higher latitudes. The synchrony of mountain pine beetle's flight period in the expanded range appears to be comparable to the limited reports from the historic range, although it may start earlier. This suggests that conditions in the new range are suitable for a coordinated dispersal flight, which is critical for the beetle's strategy of overwhelming tree defenses by attacking en masse. Forest managers can use the model to support operational decisions, e.g., when to impose hauling restrictions to reduce the risk of spread through the transport of infested material, or the time frame for control programs. Understanding the flight period may also improve our ability to assess the response of mountain pine beetle to novel and changing climates in the future.
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) | 0.020 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".