The distribution pattern of two juvenile hormone related compounds in Fraser fir and the induced response to a balsam woolly adelgid infestation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two juvenile hormone related compounds (JRCs), juvabione and dehydrojuvabione, were isolated from Fraser fir, Abies fraseri (Pursh) Poirit. Both juvabione and dehydrojuvabione concentrations had large variations across the tested trees and within trees. Juvabione, but not dehydrojuvabione, was much higher in stemwood then in branchwood. There was no significant difference in either chemical in relation to high, low, or middle branch position. To determine if juvabione concentration was influenced by an infestation of balsam woolly adelgid, Adelges piceae Ratz., branches from infested and uninfested 11-year-old Abies fraseri with were sampled at the bottom, middle, and top branches of each tree. While mean juvabione concentrations for each infested fir were higher than their uninfested counterparts, only the infested middle tree sections had mean juvabione values that were substantially higher (p = 0.078) than the corresponding uninfested tree section of all the infested firs. The two infested Abies fraseri that maintained apical dominance demonstrated the highest upper branch levels of juvabione of all the infested. These results indicate that juvabione may be induced in small Abies fraseri in response to adelgid attack. Trees that produce large quantities of this compound may possess tolerance to the adelgid. Further research is needed to elucidate this possibility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".