Assessing the Potential Distribution of Asian Gypsy Moth in Canada: A Comparison of Two Methodological Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar L.) is one of the world's worst hardwood defoliating invasive alien species. It is currently spreading across North America, damaging forest ecosystems and posing a significant economic threat. Two subspecies L. d. asiatica and L. d. japonica, collectively referred to as Asian gypsy moth (AGM) are of special concern as they have traits that make them better invaders than their European counterpart (e.g. flight capability of females). We assessed the potential distribution of AGM in Canada using two presence-only species distribution models, Maximum Entropy (MaxEnt) and Genetic Algorithm for Rule-set Prediction (GARP). In addition, we mapped AGM potential future distribution under two climate change scenarios (A1B and A2) while implementing dispersal constraints using the cellular automation model MigClim. MaxEnt had higher AUC, pAUC and sensitivity scores (0.82/1.40/1.00) when compared to GARP (0.70/1.26/0.9), indicating better discrimination of suitable versus unsuitable areas for AGM. The models indicated that suitable conditions for AGM were present in the provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The human influence index was the variable found to contribute the most in predicting the distribution of AGM. These model results can be used to identify areas at risk for this pest, to inform strategic and tactical pest management decisions.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".