Evaluation of Two Pheromone Baits for Containment and Concentration of Attack by the Western Balsam Bark Beetle, Dryocoetes confusus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In past studies, the greatest response by the western balsam bark beetle Dryocoetes confusus Swaine (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) to traps and baited trees was obtained with blend of (+)-exo- and (±)-endo-brevicomin, which mimic the natural male-produced aggregation pheromone. We conducted a tree-baiting experiment to determine whether low-release enantiospecific blends [9:1 (+) exo-brevicomin:(+)-endo-brevicomin, or 9:2 (+)-exo-brevicomin: (±)-endo-brevicomin released at 0.3, 0.1, or 0.03 mg/day] could compete with or improve the efficacy of the standard (±)-exo-brevicomin bait released at 1.2 mg/day. In this experiment, the standard and experimental baits were almost 90% effective in inducing attack by D. confusus. Two subsequent 9-ha block experiments compared the ability of the standard and 9:2 (+)-exo-brevicomin:(±)-endo-brevicomin baits to contain and concentrate infestations before harvesting. Again, both baits were equally effective as potential stand management tools based on almost 100% attack on baited trees, green-to-red tree ratios between 3:1 and 5:1, and redistribution of the majority of attack around baited rather than red trees from which beetles could emerge. We recommend that the standard bait continue to be offered commercially for treatment of stands infested by D. confusus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".