MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127681032 · doi:10.1093/jee/toaa275

Derivation of Pheromone-Based Larval Thresholds in Spruce Budworm Accounting for Distance to Defoliated Forest Stands

2021· article· en· W3127681032 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Rhainds, Ian DeMerchant, Pierre Therrien

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic Entomology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des ForêtsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChoristoneura fumiferanaSpruce budwormTortricidaeOverwinteringBiologyLepidoptera genitaliaTaigaContext (archaeology)ForestryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana Clem. (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), is the most severe defoliator of Pinaceae in Nearctic boreal forests. Three tools widely used to guide large-scale management decisions (year-to-year defoliation maps; density of overwintering second instars [L2]; number of males at pheromone traps) were integrated to derive pheromone-based thresholds corresponding to specific intergenerational transitions in larval densities (L2i → L2i+1), taking into account the novel finding that threshold estimates decline with distance to defoliated forest stands (DIST). Estimates of thresholds were highly variable between years, both numerically and in terms of interactive effects of L2i and DIST, which limit their heuristic value. In the context of early intervention strategy (L2i+1 > 6.5 individuals per branch), however, thresholds fluctuated within relatively narrow intervals across wide ranges of L2i and DIST, and values of 40-200 males per trap may thus be used as general guideline.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Economic EntomologySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207