MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776920879 · doi:10.4039/tce.2017.52

Population variability of three <i>Delia</i> species (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) from the same agricultural habitat in Québec, Canada

2017· article· en· W2776920879 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert J. Lamb, Guy Boivin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthomyiidaeBiologyMaggotHabitatPopulationAbundance (ecology)EcologyLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Long-term trap catches of seedcorn maggot, Delia platura (Meigen), onion maggot, Delia antiqua (Meigen), and cabbage maggot, Delia radicum (Linnaeus) (Diptera: Anthomyiidae), were used to test the hypothesis that related species have more similar population variability than unrelated ones. Annual abundance was estimated from trap catches for 32 years (two species) or 17 years (one species). Population variability was quantified as PV, a proportion between 0 and 1. The three Delia Robineau-Desvoidy species had PV values of 0.51–0.55 that did not differ significantly. These PV values were found to differ significantly from two unrelated species studied over the same time period in the same habitat, which had PV values of 0.39 and 0.67. The hypothesis that related species have more similar population variabilities than unrelated species in the same habitat was supported. These data strengthen the view that PV is a species-specific trait reflecting the adaptation of life histories to their habitat, with related species showing more similar adaptations than unrelated species. The polyphagous and saprophagous seedcorn maggot had PV similar to the two oligophagous herbivores, casting doubt on the hypothesis that more generalist feeders have less variable populations than more specialised feeders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207