Risk of imidacloprid to soil invertebrates when applied as basal bark spray for the control of hemlock woolly adelgid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hemlock woolly adelgid ( Adelges tsugae) is an invasive insect on the east coast of North America where it has resulted in the widespread death and decline of hemlock trees. In Canada the most commonly used control strategy is the application of imidacloprid-based insecticides by basal bark spray, which could pose risk to non-target species. We monitored soil concentrations 50–400 cm away from trees for 24 months post application of Xytect 2F at a rate of 0.278 g imidacloprid/cm diameter at breast height and conducted a preliminary risk characterization by calculating risk quotients (RQ) for soil invertebrates derived from species sensitivity distributions built from no observed effect concentrations and EC50 values. Imidacloprid was detected in 58.3%–96.8% of samples at 50 and 100 cm and 8.3%–45.8% at 200 and 400 cm from treated trees. The RQ values exceeded 1 at all times 50 cm from the tree for the median exposure, and at all distances and times for the upper 95% CI exposure. The frequency that RQ's exceeded 1 declined with distance from tree at all time periods and declined over time at 50 and 100 cm from treated trees, but not at 200 and 400 cm. Overall, the highest risk to non-target soil invertebrates from basal bark application of imidacloprid occurs within 200 cm of treated trees.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".