MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392958649 · doi:10.1111/afe.12622

A review of <i>Agrilus cuprescens</i> (Ménétries, 1832), the rose stem girdler, in North America

2024· review· en· W4392958649 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Justin K. O’Dea

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural and Forest Entomology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorthwest Center for Small Fruits ResearchOregon State UniversityWashington State University
KeywordsRose (mathematics)BiologyAgrilusBotanyHorticultureLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Agrilus cuprescens (Ménétries, 1832), the rose stem girdler, is a Palearctic Buprestidae (Coleoptera) pest of Rosa and Rubus species. Its introduction and consequent spread across North America may now make it the most widely distributed Agrilus species, globally. No evidence reviewed indicated A. cuprescens was present in North America long before it was first reported on Rosa in New Jersey, USA, in 1913. The species incrementally progressed westward, reaching the Pacific coast in Washington, USA, 101 years later. Future spread is most likely within the northern Canadian prairies and the Pacific Northwest regions. Its presence in the latter region poses a contemporary threat to epicentres of Rubus production in both the United States and Canada. As of 2022, confirmed spread within the region extended nearly to the Canadian border in Washington and the southern Willamette Valley in Oregon. The most comprehensive, foundational investigations of A. cuprescens in North America were conducted in the late 1930s and early 1940s in New York, USA, and in Utah, USA, during the late 1950s and early 1960s following damaging outbreaks on Rubus . Ongoing research in the Pacific Northwest is attempting to refine information on this pest as it progresses towards naturalization within a new North American ecological and agricultural context. This review aggregates and clarifies the geographical progression, biological understandings and management of this species in North America, which has been fraught with a convoluted history of misidentifications, and varying degrees of consideration given to it as a pest of concern.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural and Forest EntomologySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207