Drought and surface‐level solar radiation predict the severity of outbreaks of a widespread defoliating insect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Defoliating insects are a major factor impacting tree growth in temperate and boreal forests, but the effects of climate change on the severity and frequency of outbreaks of these insects are not well understood. Dendrochronological reconstruction of forest tent caterpillar ( Malacosoma disstria ) outbreaks on trembling aspen ( Populus tremuloides ) in southwestern Manitoba, Canada, from 1851 to 2010 was used to examine the effects of changes in temperature, incident surface‐level solar radiation, and drought severity on the cyclicity, frequency, and severity of outbreaks. Outbreak severity was determined by comparing the tree‐ring widths of trembling aspen with those of white spruce ( Picea glauca ), which is not a forest tent caterpillar host. Wavelet analysis suggested the cyclicity of outbreaks increased after 1930. From 1930 to 2010, the dominant period length of outbreak cycles steadily increased over time from three to seven years, coinciding with long‐term declines in drought severity. The strength of forest tent caterpillar suppression of trembling aspen growth in a given year was inversely related to incident solar radiation and drought severity during late spring (the larval feeding period) of the same year. The effect of late spring drought on the impact of forest tent caterpillar on ring growth differed from that of summer drought. There was a nonlinear relationship between growth suppression in a given year and summer drought severity in the previous year; slightly above‐average drought severity was associated with reduced impacts of the defoliator, whereas severe drought was associated with intense growth suppression. Strong suppression of aspen growth observed during outbreaks from 1983 to 2010 may be partly explained by observed long‐term trends of decreasing atmospheric transmittance of solar radiation (a phenomenon termed “global dimming”) and increasing soil moisture availability during late spring. However, as the severity and frequency of summer droughts are expected to increase over the 21st century, the nonlinear relationship between summer drought severity and growth suppression the following year suggests a future in which summer droughts precede severe outbreaks that threaten the health of boreal forest hardwood 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 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".