MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088423727 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2011441117

Assessing the ecological niche and invasion potential of the Asian giant hornet

2020· article· en· W3088423727 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gengping Zhu, Javier Gutiérrez Illán, Chris Looney, David W. Crowder

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiological dispersalHabitatEcologyInvasive speciesRange (aeronautics)NicheEcological nicheGeographyEnvironmental niche modellingIntroduced speciesBiologyPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Asian giant hornet ( Vespa mandarinia ) was recently detected in western British Columbia, Canada and Washington State, United States. V. mandarinia are an invasion concern due to their ability to kill honey bees and affect humans. Here, we used habitat suitability models and dispersal simulations to assess potential invasive spread of V. mandarinia . We show V. mandarinia are most likely to establish in areas with warm to cool annual mean temperature, high precipitation, and high human activity. The realized niche of introduced populations is small compared to native populations, suggesting introduced populations could spread into habitats across a broader range of environmental conditions. Dispersal simulations also show that V. mandarinia could rapidly spread throughout western North America without containment. Given its potential negative impacts and capacity for spread, extensive monitoring and eradication efforts throughout western North America are warranted.

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)0.000
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 score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations95
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207