Ecological Status of <i>Juglans cinerea</i> in New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
. Since it was first reported in Canada in 1990, this fungal pathogen has spread rapidly and established in New Brunswick in 1997. Apart from the first report in 1997 and another in 2004, no surveys have been conducted to assess the spread of the pathogen in the province. The purpose of this research was to survey butternut throughout its range in New Brunswick, evaluate disease occurrence as well as tree health, and investigate the impact of different topographic and tree health factors on canker incidence. Results showed that the disease has spread throughout the range of butternut in New Brunswick. The disease likely only recently (2007) spread to the northeastern-most populations, given that lower rates of canker occurrence and higher health ratings are found further away from the point of initial occurrence of the disease. Although canker incidence is high throughout the province, tree dieback is minimal, and trees still producing nuts could support opportunities for ex situ conservation. Because of the rate of pathogen spread in the province, implementing a tree improvement strategy might be the only means for maintaining the butternut genome on the landscape.
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) | 0.000 | 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".