Improvement of Pheromone Trapping in Low Density Populations of <i>Choristoneura Pinus Pinus</i> (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pheromone baited bucket traps (e.g., Multipher) are popular as a monitoring tool for the jack pine budworm, Choristoneura pinus pinus Freeman (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), in Canada. However, there is no evidence to support their use when budworm populations are low. We therefore evaluated the capture rate of bucket traps at two placement heights (2 vs 6 m) in two jack pine forests in 2011, having low (≤5 fifth instars per mfoliated branch length) budworm populations. Compared to wing traps (e.g., Pherocon 1C), the trap design used initially to evaluate efficacy of the C. pinus pheromone, bucket traps caught fewer C. pinus and capture rates of both trap designs did not differ significantly between the two heights tested. Loss of bucket traps at 2 m, due to black bears, suggested that higher placement of traps was warranted to maintain the integrity of the array. However, wing traps are recommended due to their ability to consistently catch more moths when C. pinus populations are low.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".