MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035325404 · doi:10.1079/pavsnnr202015037

Classical insect biocontrol in North America, 1985 to 2018: a pest control strategy that is dying out?

2020· article· en· W3035325404 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCABI Reviews · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPEST analysisBiological pest controlParasitoidPredationBiologyPest controlNatural enemiesEcologyIntegrated pest managementToxicologyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This review is a summary of a new catalog on the use of classical biological control of arthropods in North America since 1985. In this new catalog, we reviewed releases since 1985 of exotic parasitoids and predaceous insects for classical biocontrol of invasive insects in Canada, Mexico, the continental USA, and U.S. overseas areas. Here, we summarize the catalog and extract trends in usage and success. Trends measured included numbers of agents released, numbers established, numbers having a positive impact on the target pests, and numbers of projects initiated, which allow readers to determine if use of this method of insect control has increased, declined, or held steady over the studied period. These trends provide understanding of the social relationship between countries and this form of pest control and how it has changed over time. During this period, there were 208 parasitoid releases (=species × country or overseas U.S. area) compared to 29 for predators. Of these parasitoid releases, 112 (53.8%) resulted in establishment, and 57 (27.4%) controlled the target pest partially or completely. Most releases occurred in the USA, and we calculated trends for parasitoids per 5-year period. From 1985 to 2018, numbers of parasitoids released (counting the continental USA, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, Marianna Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands separately) declined per 5-year interval from 52 to 7, an 86.5% reduction. The percentage of newly released parasitoids that established increased from 42 to 71%, a 1.7-fold increase, but the number of newly established parasitoid species that reduced their target pests declined from 73 to 40%. Also, the number of new projects initiated per 5-year period decreased from 31 to 5, an 84% decrease. The percentage of projects reducing their target pests showed no strong trend: 1985–1989, 42% vs. 2010–2014, 60%. Chalcidoids were most effective; of 119 chalcidoid releases, 76 (63.9%) established, and 45 (37.8%) reduced their target pests. Chalcidoids, based on available literature host records, were not more specific than less effective groups, despite the view that higher efficacy would be associated with greater host-specificity. The predominance of chalcidoids is likely due to their frequent use against scales, whiteflies, mealybugs, aphids, and psyllids, which are tightly associated with live plants, tend to be moved frequently internationally, and often become agricultural pests in areas where they are introduced.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.009

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.210 · 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