MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133066653

Susceptibility of pine plantations to attack by the pine shoot beetle (Tomicus Piniperda L.) in southern Ontario

2003· dissertation· W7133066653 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Ryan E. Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsScots pineShootBasal areaCanopyPinus <genus>Woody plant
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tomicus piniperda (L.) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), was discovered in Ohio in 1992 and spread throughout southern Ontario, Quebec, and the United States. The objectives of this study were to (i) determine the relationships between tree and site characteristics and the number of stem and shoot attacks by T. piniperda in southern Ontario; and (ii) determine if T. piniperda is an aggressive beetle in southern Ontario. Forty-three sites of varying pine species compositions were surveyed across southern Ontario. An abundance of dead and low-vigour pine trees increased susceptibility of sites to attacks by T. piniperda . Significant negative relationships were detected between the number of attacks and the mean height, age, dbh, basal area, canopy cover, duff depth, and radial growth increments of the sites. Pure red pine sites had significantly fewer attacks than sites of pure scots pine and mixed jack pine, which was attributed to differences in tree vigour, and management.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicForest Insect Ecology and Management→French-language works237,207→