MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012449759 · doi:10.4039/tce.2020.8

Evaluating methods to detect and monitor North American larval parasitoids of the emerald ash borer (Coleoptera: Buprestidae)

2020· article· en· W3012449759 on OpenAlexaff
Justin M. Gaudon, D. Barry Lyons, Gene Jones, Jeremy D. Allison, Sandy M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Resources CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuprestidaeEmerald ash borerAgrilusBiologyBraconidaeHymenopteraBiological pest controlBotanyParasitoidEcologyFraxinus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Populations of native North American parasitoids attacking Agrilus Curtis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) species have recently been considered as part of an augmentative biological control programme in an attempt to manage emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire, a destructive wood-boring beetle discovered in North America in 2002. We evaluate trapping methods to detect and monitor populations of two important native larval parasitoids, Phasgonophora sulcata Westwood (Hymenoptera: Chalcididae) and Atanycolus Förster (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) species, attacking emerald ash borer in its introduced range. We found that purple prism traps captured more P. sulcata than green prism traps, yellow pan traps, and log samples and thus were considered better for detecting and monitoring P. sulcata populations. Trap type did not affect the number of captures of Atanycolus species. Surprisingly, baiting prism traps with a green leaf volatile or manuka oil did not significantly increase captures of P. sulcata or Atanycolus species. Based on these results, unbaited purple prism traps would be optimal for sampling these native emerald ash borer parasitoids in long-term management programmes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207