Interactions Between Pieris oleracea and Pieris rapae (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) Butterflies, and the Biological Control Agents Cotesia glomerata and Cotesia rubecula (Hymenoptera: Braconidae).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pieris oleracea, formerly Pieris napi, was once a widespread pierid butterfly in New England until the introduction of a biological control agent, Cotesia glomerata. It has been suggested that C. glomerata is responsible for the range reduction of P. oleracea. There are been several introductions of a second more specialized biological control agent, Cotesia rubecula, to the United States since the 1960âs. My first goal was to determine the current distribution and status of P. rapae parasitoids and the effectiveness of C. rubecula as a biological control agent since its release. The findings of a survey I conducted of the parasitoid community of P. rapae indicate that C. rubecula now occurs as far west as North Dakota and has become the dominant parasitoid of P. rapae in the northeastern and north central United States and adjacent parts of southeastern Canada, where it has displaced , the previously dominant parasitoid.\nSurvival of artificially established cohorts of P. rapae larvae was assessed in a collard patch on an organic vegetable farm in western Massachusetts. There was a significant drop in larval survival between the 4th and 5th instar due to parasitism by C. rubecula. This was change from survival curves of P. rapae from a 1985-1986 study, in which there was a significant drop in survival between the 5th instar and pupal stage due to C. glomerata.\nThe final goal of my thesis work is to try to understand why P. oleracea was able to survive at the focal study site in Lenox, MA despite parasitoid pressure and range reduction elsewhere in New England. In olfactometer tests, there was no difference in attractiveness of naïve C. glomerata females to volatiles of either Cardamine pratensis (cuckooflower) foliage, the host plant of P. oleracea or Brassica olercea (collard) foliage (P = 0.51). In order to determine if overtopping by other vegetation may provide an enemy free space for P. oleracea by affecting detection by C. glomerata, cage experiments were conducted. Overtopping vegetation had a significant effect on parasitism by C. glomerata (F = 12.8, df = 3, P <0.001), and may be the reason P. oleracea has been able to thrive at the Lenox, MA site.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".