MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766940761 · doi:10.1002/9781119256106.ch6

The Biotic Environment

2017· other· en· W2766940761 on OpenAlexafffund
Jenny S. Cory, Pauline S. Deschodt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimons Foundation
KeywordsBiologyIntraguild predationEcologyPredationHost (biology)Competition (biology)PopulationInvertebrateParasitoidMicrobiomeBiological pest controlPredator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses three areas of biotic interactions involving invertebrate pathogens: tritrophic interactions among invertebrates, pathogens, and plants; competition within the natural enemy complex; and microbe-mediated defense by the host microbiome. Invertebrates are attacked by a wide range of natural enemies, including numerous species of predators, in addition to many groups of pathogens and parasitoids. These can interact with a host at the individual level (within-host dynamics) and at the population level through intraguild interactions and potentially via other members of the community in which these species are embedded. The use of natural enemies to suppress pest populations in agriculture, horticulture, and forestry means that it is important to understand how interactions between different control agents affect their ability to attack, kill the target host, and spread within the pest population. Laboratory studies involving mixed infections with entomopathogens are common at the within-host level, but tend to focus solely on host mortality or parasitoid emergence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0580.015

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207