Evaluation of Pheromone Traps and Lures for Trapping Male Agriotes sputator (Coleoptera: Elateridae) Beetles in Eastern Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In North America, monitoring for Agriotes spp. click beetles typically has been done using Vernon beetle traps baited with bubble cap sex pheromone lures. This trap and lure are no longer produced commercially and a new trap, the Vernon pitfall trap, and lure design are used now for both invasive Agriotes and native pest species. Herein we compare the 2 trapping methods for Agriotes sputator (L.) (Coleoptera: Elateridae), and provide a calibration factor between them to allow comparison of survey results using the different methods. When deployed for the entire swarming season, Vernon pitfall traps fitted with the new capsule lures collect 0.7 as many A. sputator as Vernon beetle traps fitted with the bubble cap lures, and Vernon beetle traps fitted with capsule lures collect 0.5 as many beetles as Vernon beetle traps fitted with bubble cap lures. Unlike bubble cap lures, however, capsule-style lures need to be primed (maintained at room temperature for 3 wk) before deployment in the field, or else their initial attractiveness will be limited and trap catches will not be representative of populations present at the time. In addition, results from field studies indicate that these capsule lures deplete over the swarming season, and depending on the trapping objective (e.g., mass trapping) may need to be replaced after 5 to 6 wk of deployment. Increasing the lure load to 2 or 4 the regular 40 L geranyl butanoate, or the capsule container size from 1.0 to 2.5 mL, did not significantly increase the number of A. sputator collected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it