MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7115896182 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2025-0281

Impact of imidacloprid-based chemical control for hemlock woolly adelgid ( <i>Adelges tsugae</i> ) on the eastern red-backed salamander ( <i>Plethodon cinereus</i> )

2025· article· en· W7115896182 on OpenAlexafffundvenue

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest ServiceDalhousie UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of New Brunswick
KeywordsTsugaInfestationTransectAbundance (ecology)ImidaclopridBelt transectBiological pest controlAbies lasiocarpa

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hemlock woolly adelgid (HWA; Adelges tsugae) is an invasive insect causing widespread mortality of eastern hemlock ( Tsuga canadensis) across eastern North America, altering forest structure and associated ecosystems. The insecticide imidacloprid is used for HWA control, but its persistence and potential for soil and water contamination raises concern for fossorial species. We used the eastern red-backed salamander (RBS; Plethodon cinereus) as an indicator species to assess how HWA infestation and imidacloprid treatment influence hemlock stands in southwestern Nova Scotia. We conducted line transect surveys across two HWA-infested sites—each containing four treated and four untreated 1 ha stands—and one uninfested control site with four mature hemlock stands. We applied a multi-model Akaike’s information criterion corrected for small sample sizes framework to test the effects of treatment, infestation, and environmental covariates on RBS abundance, body condition, and abundance within a zone of potential residue exposure. Treatment and infestation were the only predictors of abundance: treatment increased abundance, whereas infestation reduced it. Canopy openness, soil pH, and soil moisture did not differ significantly among stands, and none were found to be predictors of body condition or abundance within the zone of potential exposure. These results reinforce the value of integrating chemical control with long-term monitoring while biological control strategies develop.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicAmphibian and Reptile Biology→French-language works237,207→