MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6968530180 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15701471

Fig. 3 in Host suitability of Trichoplusia ni and Chrysodeixis chalcites (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) for native and nonnative parasitoids expanding their host range

2020· other· en· W6968530180 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParasitoidTrichoplusiaParasitismHost (biology)Biological pest controlFunctional response

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fig. 3. Suitability parameters of hosts Trichoplusia ni and Chrysodeixis chalcites parasitised by Cotesia vanessae. Parasitoid success is expressed as the number of hosts from which adult solitary or gregarious parasitoids are developed. Parasitoid cocoon mortality is expressed as the number of developed cocoons from which adult parasitoids did not emerge. The host success is measured as the number of hosts that developed into adult moths, whether the host was parasitised or not. Host mortality is calculated from the number of hosts that died after parasitism without developing into a moth or parasitoid. Sample size = 20; replicates = 10. Notes: Means (±SE) within each variable response with the same letter are not significantly different (P> 0.05) between host species. Parasitoid success and host mortality were analysed using ANOVA, and parasitoid cocoon mortality and host success were analysed using Mann–Whitney U tests for independent samples.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→French-language works237,207→