A sampling unit for estimating gall densities of Paradiplosis tumifex (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) in
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract—We used field surveys in central New Brunswick, Canada to establish efficient sampling procedures for evaluating densities of balsam gall midge, Paradiplosis tumifex Gagné (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae), and its associated damage in balsam fir, Abies balsamea (Linnaeus) Miller, Christmas trees. Infestation was greater in larger trees than smaller trees and in mid-crown and upper-crown branches than in the lower crown. However, the relationship between gallmaker infestation and site, height class, and crown level was highly complex and may involve covariation of shoot length with height class and crown level. As a result, patterns in infestation did not lend themselves to simple interpretation. This complexity highlights the need to find sampling units that provide simpler but reasonably accurate predictors of gallmaker impact at the whole-tree scale. We identified such a sampling unit: gallmaker density in first-order current-year shoots of a mid-crown branch explained 81 % of the variance in total infestation among trees. Résumé—A ̀ partir de relevés de terrain menés dans le centre du Nouveau-Brunswick au Canada, nous avons voulu établir une procédure d’échantillonnage permettant d’évaluer efficacement la densite ́ de la cécidomyie du sapin (Paradiplosis tumifex Gagné) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) ainsi que
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".