Modeling Mountain Pine Beetle Abundance in Novel Hosts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The mountain pine beetle has recently expanded its range into northern and central Alberta, posing an immediate threat to the novel host, jack pine. To date, some experiments suggest that jack pine has limited defensive capabilities despite of the restrictions from the physical environment. In this work, we explore the susceptibility of jack pine compared to the primary host, lodgepole pine, evaluating the risk of potential range expansion into Canada’s boreal forest. We employ a hierarchical model, incorporating environmental and ecological covariates, to examine mountain pine beetle dynamics in a pine forest with lodgepole, hybrid and jack pines. Our results show that pine species significantly influence the probability of being killed, with jack pine being less likely to be infested than lodgepole pine, all else being equal. The hierarchical model demonstrates that beetles perform poorer in jack pine, characterized by a reproduction rate 0.16 times that of non-jack pine. Although jack pine is a suitable host, our results indicate that the number of infestations in jack pine could be lower than in lodgepole pine, with a reduced probability of emerging beetles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".