Do natural enemies explain fluctuations in low‐density spruce budworm populations?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the causal pathways through which forest insect outbreaks are triggered is important for resource managers. However, detailed population dynamics studies are hard to conduct in low-density, pre-outbreak populations because the insects are difficult to sample in sufficient numbers. Using laboratory-raised larvae installed in the field across a 1,000 km east-west gradient in Québec (Canada) over an 11-yr period, we examined if parasitism and predation were likely to explain fluctuations in low-density spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana; SBW) populations. Parasitism rates by the two main larval parasitoid species, Elachertus cacoeciae and Tranosema rostrale, peaked during different years. This suggests that temporal fluctuations in overall parasitism were partly buffered by compensatory dynamics among parasitoid species. Still, spatial covariance analyses indicate that the residual interannual variation in parasitism rates was substantial and correlated over large distances (up to 700 km). On the other hand, interannual variation in predation rates was not spatially correlated. Piecewise structural equation models indicate that temporal variation in parasitism and predation does not influence temporal variation in wild SBW abundance. Spatially, however, SBWs installed in warmer locations tended to show higher parasitism rates, and these higher rates correlated with lower wild SBW population levels. Overall, the results indicate that large-scale drops in parasitism occur and could potentially contribute to SBW population increases. However, during the period covered by this study, other factors such as direct effects of weather on SBW larval development or indirect effects through host tree physiology or phenology were more likely to explain large-scale variation in wild SBW populations.
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) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".