MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800801326 · doi:10.15273/pnsis.v49i2.8162

Chemical light sticks as bait to trap predaceous aquatic insects: effect of light colour

2018· article· en· W2800801326 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Randy Lauff, Mallory MacDonnell, Barry R. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhototaxisEcologyMinnowBotanyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measured the efficiency of floating minnow-traps (Gee traps), unbaited or baited with red, green, blue, or white chemical light sticks (glowsticks) to trap large, predaceous, aquatic beetles (Coleoptera) and bugs (Hemiptera) in 50 fresh water, lentic systems in northern Nova Scotia, Canada. Standard minnow-traps buoyed with Styrofoam® floats were set overnight in a variety of freshwater habitats, including ponds, marshes, bog pools and vegetated lake margins throughout the ice-free seasons over three years, for a total of 695 trap-nights. Giant Water Bugs (Lethocerus americanus) were captured with equal frequency in traps baited with any colour glowstick and in unbaited controls. Brown Waterscorpions (Ranatra fusca) were significantly more abundant in light-baited traps than in dark controls, and showed a strong preference for green lures over other colours. The large, Vertical Diving Beetle Dytiscus verticalis was caught significantly more than expected with white or red lures and significantly less with green or blue lures; males were caught even less often with green or blue lures than in unbaited controls. Our results reveal a heretofore unknown component of the biology of these insects, and suggest a novel method for simple and effective sampling of aquatic insects in still waters.Keywords: light; trapping; phototaxis; aquatic insects; colour

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of ScienceSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207