MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254690507 · doi:10.24124/2010/bpgub699

Interactions of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae, with typical and atypical host material, lodgepole pine and interior hybrid spruce, in the central interior of British Columbia.

2010· dissertation· en· W4254690507 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fraser R. McKee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMountain pine beetleDendroctonusHost (biology)Pinus contortaEcologyBiologyPopulationPicea engelmanniiBark beetleBark (sound)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactions between mountain pine beetles and spruce hosts are rare, but a high frequency of mountain pine beetle attacks on interior hybrid spruce, an atypical host species, have recently been observed within the central interior of British Columbia, an area experiencing a severe outbreak of mountain pine beetle. I first examined the effect of natal history on host selection by females, and settlement patterns of conspecific males. In a second study, I examined the effects of host species and competitors on mountain pine beetle reproduction in a field experiment. The third study examined the association of within-stand beetle population density and pine vs. spruce availability with attraction to traps baited with pine and spruce host material. Using mountain pine beetle as a model organism, this work emphasizes insect host selection and reproductive success, with potential implications for host range expansion in eruptive herbivores. --P. ii.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Insect Ecology and Management→French-language works237,207→