An Assessment Of Tree Banding Techniques To Capture Cankerworm Defoliators Of Elm And Ash Trees In Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fall cankerworm ( Alsophila pometaria L.) and spring cankerworm ( Paleacrita vernata Peck) are widely distributed across North America. The larvae feed on the leaves of several species of urban street trees, and repeated severe defoliation can cause a reduction in growth and may contribute to tree mortality. This study examined the effectiveness of Tanglefoot™-covered tree bands and the Bug Barrier Tree Band™ in preventing the upward movement of female cankerworms on the trunk by comparing capture rates of adult moths. There were no significant differences among tree species in the number of A. pometaria adults caught, while P. vernata showed a preference for elm ( Ulmus spp.) over ash ( Fraxinus spp.). Up to 25% of female moths crossed the Bug Barrier Tree Band, and up to 20% of females crossed the Tanglefoot-covered bands in three experiments in 2002 and 2003. There was no significant difference between the two band types in the proportion of females crossing bands. Larval populations were not large enough to determine the effect of the bands on reducing tree defoliation. The Bug Barrier Tree Band was easier to install and remove than the Tanglefoot-covered bands and required considerably less clean-up afterward.
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".