MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963893903 · doi:10.1111/eea.12806

Temporal variation in abundance of male and female spruce budworms at combinatory associations of light traps and pheromone traps

2019· article· en· W2963893903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marc Rhainds, Dan Lavigne, Troy Rideout, Jean‐Noël Candau

Bibliographic record

VenueEntomologia Experimentalis et Applicata · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaGovernment of Newfoundland and LabradorCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPheromonePheromone trapAbundance (ecology)EcologyAttractionPhenologyRange (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A 3‐year study (2014–2016) was conducted at Rocky Harbour near the west coast of Newfoundland, Canada, to record the abundance and phenology of adult spruce budworms captured at traps, using a factorial design (light traps and pheromone traps deployed contiguously or segregated spatially). Budworms were most abundant and occurred seasonally earlier in 2014 than in 2015 and 2016; these findings held generally true for males and females. The geographic setting of Newfoundland (large island isolated from the mainland by an oceanic barrier of >100 km across) provides an ideal location to discriminate local flight from long‐range immigrations; in our study, however, immigrations cannot be ruled out for any single day of trapping due to broad overlap in emergence patterns at Rocky Harbour relative to forest stands with known populations of budworms on the mainland. Based on moderate daily variation in adult abundance, however, major immigration events (defined as external deposition of budworms with large numerical amplitude) likely did not take place at Rocky Harbor between 2014 and 2016. Males were more abundant at light traps coupled with pheromone traps, whereas abundance of males at pheromone traps was similar with or without contiguous light traps. This outcome may be mediated by lower range of attraction for light traps (usually <100 m) and (generally assumed to be several hundreds of meters). Females were equally abundant at light traps with or without pheromone traps. As expected, males were captured earlier in the season at pheromone traps than at light traps, and females occurred later in the season due to protandry. The onset of flight observed at light traps or pheromone traps in 2015 and 2016 occurred 10–15 days later than simulated predictions; caution is thus warranted as to conclusions derived on computer modeling of adult emergence.

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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntomologia Experimentalis et ApplicataSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207