MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036836064 · doi:10.1002/ps.5972

Experimental removal of invasive <scp>Africanized</scp> honey bees increased breeding population size of the endangered <scp>Lear's</scp> macaw

2020· article· en· W3036836064 on OpenAlexaff
Erica Pacífico, Caroline A. Efstathion, Thiago Filadelfo, Roberta A Cunha, Fernanda R. Paschotto, Francisco V. Dénes, James D. Gilardi, José L. Tella

Bibliographic record

VenuePest Management Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMacawPopulationEndangered speciesNest (protein structural motif)Threatened speciesBiologyEcologyZoologyHabitatDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Invasive Africanized honey bees potentially compete with cavity-nesting birds in South America. However, the impacts of this competition and its conservation consequences to threatened species are poorly known. We quantified the presence of these bees and assessed their competition for cliff cavities used by nesting Lear's macaws Anodorhynchus leari, a globally endangered parrot endemic to the Caatinga biome of Brazil. We treated beehives with permethrin by shooting them with a crossbow bolt that distributed the compound upon impact. When feasible, we removed the comb and applied an insecticide (fipronil) to deter bee recolonization. We subsequently surveyed the macaw breeding population to verify whether our treatment allowed for nest recruitment in cavities previously occupied by bees. RESULTS: We recorded > 100 beehives in the nesting cliffs. Hives outnumbered macaw nests tenfold in two areas recently recolonized by macaws. Cavities occupied by bees were significantly higher than those occupied by macaws, suggesting that macaws may be forced to breed in lower cavities. None of the untreated cavities (n = 50) were occupied by nesting macaws, whereas 15% of treated cavities (n = 52) were occupied within 2 years post treatment. Treated cavities occupied by macaws were significantly higher than those not occupied. Hive management increased macaw breeding population by 71% of the macaw breeding population increase. CONCLUSION: Experimental hive treatments were effective in restoring nesting resources lost due to bee infestation. An intensive and continued eradication program is recommended to enhance macaw habitat restoration, facilitating its expansion into historical areas. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePest Management ScienceSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207