Decline in common milkweed along roadsides around Ottawa, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past two decades, monarch butterfly populations have been declining. This decline has been partly attributed to the extensive loss of breeding habitat through the reduction of common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca, the larval host plant) through herbicides. While the decline of milkweed has been well documented in the US, less is known about its decline in Canada. To take a first step in quantifying its potential decline, we compared roadside milkweed abundance at sites around Ottawa, Ontario, Canada in 2018, to a county-wide estimate of milkweed abundance in 1943 and 1944. We also evaluated the effect of roadside characteristics on milkweed abundance at these sites. Current milkweed density in the Ottawa region is 33–86% lower than it was 75 years ago. We found milkweed at 67% of our 100 sites and found less milkweed at sites with a higher number of lanes in the road adjacent to the roadside. Interestingly, mowing indices were not significant predictors of milkweed abundance. Here we document the first quantitative evidence for milkweed decline over the past 75 years in Canada, which has likely contributed to the decline of breeding monarchs in Canada.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".