Do visual cues associated with larger diameter trees influence host selection by <i>Tetropium fuscum</i> (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae)?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Tetropium fuscum (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) is an invasive phloeophagous beetle established in Atlantic Canada that infests stressed and moribund Picea Dietrich (Pinaceae) species. Successfully colonised trees tend to be large in diameter (>10 cm diameter at breast height), but whether diameter influences host selection, larval performance, or both, is unknown. We tested the hypothesis that T. fuscum host selection is influenced by visual cues associated with tree diameter by counting the number of adults landing on 29 Picea rubens Sargent ranging in diameter at breast height from 12.2 to 37.5 cm. All trees were wrapped with sticky bands and baited with aggregation pheromone and host volatiles to make them equally attractive with regard to olfactory cues. We found significant positive relationships between the mean number of T. fuscum per sticky band and tree diameter, and also between phloem thickness and tree diameter. We conclude that the positive association between host diameter and T. fuscum infestation is at least partially due to the positive influence of diameter on landing rate, and that this may benefit the beetle because larger diameter trees have more food for developing larvae. However, there was no effect of tree diameter on the mean number of adults per m2 of sticky band and thus no evidence that T. fuscum actively selects larger diameter hosts based on visual cues. The positive relationship between landing rate and host diameter may simply be due to greater chances of airborne beetles being passively intercepted on larger versus smaller trees.
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".