MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283071649 · doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.846144

Predicting Emerald Ash Borer Adult Emergence and Peak Flight Activity in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

2022· article· en· W4283071649 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brett MacDonald, Rick Baydack, Alana R. Westwood, David H. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
KeywordsEmerald ash borerAgrilusBuprestidaeFraxinusForestryGeographyLarchEcologyInfestationEnvironmental scienceBiologyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The invasive emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennisFairmaire; Coleoptera: Buprestidae) has killed tens of millions of ash (Fraxinus spp.)trees across North America.A. planipenniswas first detected in Winnipeg, Manitoba in 2017 and has the potential to become a serious threat to the city's ash canopy which accounts for ~30% of the public tree inventory. The goal of this study was to predict when adultA. planipennisemergence and peak activity would occur in Winnipeg to help logistical planning for the implementation of a city-wide management program. The management program would focus on detection and limiting the spread of the beetle with the objective of preserving ash trees as long as possible allowing for more proactive management of the EAB infestation. To predict adult emergence and peak activity ofA. planipennis, we used local weather station data to calculate the number of degree-days accumulated in each year for the 1970–2019 period using three different degree-day accumulation models. Developmental thresholds forA. planipenniswere derived from previous North American studies. The estimated mean emergence dates for the 50-year period were June 14 ± 8.5 days (double sine model), June 14 ± 8.5 days (single sine model), and June 19 ± 9.1 days (standard model) whereas the peak activity dates were July 16 ± 8.8 days (double sine model), July 17 ± 8.7 days (single sine model), and July 21 ± 9.4 days (standard model). Meteorological records indicate that temperatures in the Winnipeg region have increased over the study period. However, our predicted emergence dates do not significantly differ over the 50 years examined in the study, although estimated peak activity dates are significantly earlier, suggesting that EAB movement may benefit from climate change. The results from this study will provide managers with information regarding the temporal behavior ofA. plannipennisin Winnipeg allowing for improved timing of control measures and monitoring, thereby extending the projected life span of a significant ash tree population within the Winnipeg urban region. The management model developed for Winnipeg could serve as an example for other locations in the prairie region of North America.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207