MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386120221 · doi:10.22543/0090-0222.2194

First Report of the European Oak Borer, <i>Agrilus Sulcicollis</i> (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), in the United States

2018· article· en· W4386120221 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert A. Haack, Toby R. Petrice, James E. Zablotny

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Great Lakes Entomologist · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuprestidaeAgrilusEmerald ash borerBiologyForestryEcologyGeographyFraxinus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agrilus sulcicollis Lacordaire was first reported in North America from (Quercus rubra L.), on sticky traps, and also found in insect collections that dated from 1995. After hearing of this discovery in Ontario, unidentified Agrilus specimens that had been collected in Michigan during recent field studies of the emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire, were examined. As a result, A. sulcicollis specimens were identified that had been collected in four Michigan counties during 2003 to 2008: Ingham, Oakland, Saint Clair, and Washtenaw. All Michigan specimens had been collected from sticky traps or reared from English oak, Q. robur L. This is the first establishment record of A. sulcicollis in the United States. In addition, A. sulcicollis adults were collected on sticky traps in Monroe and Orleans counties, New York, during surveys in 2009 that targeted A. planipennis. In Europe, A. sulcicollis infests primarily oak. Information is provided on U.S. collection records, U.S. port interception records, and basic life history data of A. sulcicollis.

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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.226
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Great Lakes EntomologistSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207