MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6945090896 · doi:10.25316/ir-20394

Competitive Effects of Honey Bee (Apis melifera) Hives on Morphology and Morphology-Based Abundance of Bumble Bees (Apidae: Bombus) in an Urban Prairie Landscape (City of Red Deer, Alberta)

2025· dissertation· en· W6945090896 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library) · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHoney beeAbundance (ecology)ApoideaEndangered speciesApidaePollinatorNectarRelative species abundanceHoney Bees

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis aimed to establish whether there were measurable effects of managed honey bees (Apis melifera) on bumble bee (Bombus) populations in the City of Red Deer, with an intent to aid wild bee conservation in the area as well as decision-making regarding possible legislation of honey bee keeping within the city. A growing body of research has documented the negative effects of managed honey bees on wild bee populations has been accumulating in many regions over several decades, while others are yet undocumented. Competition for floral resources between introduced honey bees and native bumble bees are expected to have the greatest impact on bumble bees of similar morphologies to honey bees, including body size and tongue length. Two pairs of sites (located near to- and far from honey bee hives) were compared for effects on bumble bee body size and abundance relative to tongue length. Contrary to expectations, short-tongued bumble bees (where tongue-length is similar to honey bees) were more abundant in sites near to honey bees and long-tongue bumble bees were less abundant, which does not support our hypothesis. Rather, it suggests a novel disproportionate impact of honey bees on long-tongued bumble bees. The data indicate that current hobby (honey)beekeeping in this municipality is negatively influencing the abundance of bumble bee groups. Discovery of an endangered species (Bombus bohemicus) and a threatened species (Bombus terricola) added to the value of this study. Recommendations for city policy to protect these species, other bumble bees, and wild bees overall, are that honey bee keeping within City limits be limited and regulated, or, preferably, outright prohibited. This project contributes to better understanding of overall bumble bee populations relating to Red Deer’s landscape and may serve as part of a baseline for future research.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library)→Same topicCell Image Analysis Techniques→French-language works237,207→