BIOL2050 Ecology Field Sample Training - Comparison of the Abundance and Diversity of Insects in the Danby Woodlot as Opposed to the Grassland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods: In order to assess the variation in abundance and diversity of insect species between geographically adjacent grassland and woodlot areas, 9 pan traps were set up in the Danby woodlot and 9 were set up in the Danby grassland. The pan traps consisted of Solo bowls which were filled halfway with soap water and were arranged in an approximate line about 2 meters apart from one another, in both the grassland and woodlot respectively. The purpose of the soap water is that it breaks the surface tension of water allowing for insects to fall in. Each line of 9 traps was set out in a pattern alternating Red, White and Blue coloured bowls. The purpose of the different colours is to attract a broad range of insects, as the colours mimic the colour of flowers. After 2 hours, the pan traps were examined and the total number of insects in the soap water, as well as the number of different insect species (distinguished by morphology - by differences in appearance) were counted. Study Site: This field study took place in the Danby Woodlot on York University's Keele Campus in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Approximate GPS coordinates of the campus are 43.7735° N, 79.5019° W. The study site spanned both the woodlots and the adjacent grassland area. The study was conducted on Thursday September 29th, 2016. The temperature was approximately 15°C with light rain and wind strength at around a 5 on the Beaufort scale. 18 Solo Bowls in the colours Blue, Yellow, and White were used (6 of each colour), as well as soap water, in order to conduct this experiment. No other equipment was necessary, as the data was collected by visual examination to distinguish between insect species and manual tallying of total number of insects. Hypothesis: There will be variation in the total number of insects and the number of recognizable taxonomic units between the grassland and woodlot locations. Additionally, another factor of the surrounding environment to affect the data will be the colours of the native flowers of the area, causing a variation in the total number of insects and the number of recognizable taxonomic units between the different colours of pan traps. Predictions: 1) There will be a greater total number of insects in the pan traps placed in the woodlot location than the grassland due to the fact that this area is less disturbed by wind as a result of the high density of trees in the area, making it easier for insects to move into the traps. 2) There will be a greater number of Recognizable Taxonomic Units (RTUs) in the pan traps placed in the woodlot as opposed to those in the grassland, as this is an area with less disturbances, allowing a variety of species who may not have sufficient adaptions to survive in the more open disturbed grassland, to inhabit it. 3) There will be a greater total number of insects and number of recognizable taxonomic units in the blue and white coloured pan traps as a result of the fact that the majority of the native plants found in the Danby woodlot and grassland area are yellow and white in colour and will thus better attract the native pollinators and other insects. Metadata: Pan Trap Colour (Categorical Attribute): Pan trap bowls were red, blue, and yellow. The colours were distinguished visually by the naked eye. Location (Categorical Attribute): The two locations - grassland and woodlot were visually differentiated between based on the criteria that the area densely populated by trees was woodlot, and the open area primarily consisting of only grass and shrubs was grassland. Total Number of Insects (Categorical Attribute): Total number of organisms displaying the general morphology of insects was manually tallied; counting the number of insects submerged in the soap water. Number of different Recognizable Taxonomic Units (Categorical Attribute): Insect species were visually distinguished relative to one another through their morphology, differentiating using variables such as relative size, colour, wing presence/absence. Group Members: Vanessa Guo, Monica Matta, Krysten Zarivnij
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
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".