MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112358920 · doi:10.26077/2ee2-cf7b

Repellent Surface Applications for Pest Birds

2020· article· en· W3112358920 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

VenueLincoln (University of Nebraska) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEntomological Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPEST analysisSurface (topology)EcologyEnvironmental scienceAgroforestryBiologyMathematicsGeometryBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Common pest birds in the United States include the non-native European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), and the pigeon (Columba livia domestica), as well as native birds including Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and gull species (Laridae). Large concentrations of pest birds can create human health hazards and monetary losses due to consumption of crops, depredation, and fecal contamination and accumulation. Fecal contamination hazards include the potential spread of zoonotic diseases including antimicrobial-resistant zoonoses and human injury due to the accumulation of fecal material on walking surfaces. Additionally, fecal accumulation causes structural and aesthetic damage due to the accelerated deterioration of building materials and increased maintenance costs. Methods to alleviate hazards and damages from aggregations of pest birds are needed. In a series of 3 experiments conducted in Fort Collins, Colorado, USA, between 2016 and 2018, we evaluated 3 surface-application repellent formulations for the reduction of fecal accumulations due to European starlings: Airepel® HC with castor oil, an anthraquinone-based repellent; Airepel HC with castor oil without anthraquinone; and MS2, a novel inert formulation with a tacky, oily texture. We compared each formulation directly to an untreated control. All 3 formulations reduced fecal accumulations beneath treated aluminum perches as compared to fecal accumulations beneath untreated aluminum perches. Interestingly, both formulations that contained no anthraquinone worked equally well or better than Airepel HC with castor oil, the anthraquinone-based formulation. The benefits of an exclusively inert formulation include less risk to applicators and non-target species. Comprehensive experimental field testing of these surface-application repellent formulations is 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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.161 · 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