Defensive secretions of larvae of a carabid beetle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Secretions of an eversible gland on the metathorax of larvae of Chlaenius cordicollis K irby ( C oleoptera: C arabidae) are investigated by headspace analysis using solid phase microextraction followed by gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry ( GC‐MS ). Larvae from M anitoba, C anada and P ennsylvania, U.S.A ., are sampled. Nine presumed defensive compounds are detected when the gland is everted, and this represents the first characterization of defensive secretions of larvae of a carabid beetle. With the exception of a single component (2‐methoxy‐4‐methylphenol), these compounds are distinct from those found in the defensive secretion of adult C. cordicollis . However, seven are more oxidized versions of the alkylphenolic compounds secreted by adult beetles: three hydroquinones (hydroquinone, methylhydroquinone and 2,3‐dimethylhydroquinone) and four quinones ( p ‐benzoquinone, toluquinone, 2,3‐dimethylquinone and ethyl‐ p ‐benzoquinone). An additional alkoxyphenol (2‐methoxy‐4‐ethylphenol) is also detected. Two patterns of composition are observed: in one, p ‐benzoquinone and hydroquinone are undetectable and the ratio of toluquinone : 2,3‐dimethylquinone is 1 : 4.6 ± 0.6 (mean ± SE ); in the other, all nine compounds are detectable and the ratio of toluquinone : 2,3‐dimethylquinone is 1 : 1.0 ± 0.2. These differences in pattern do not appear to be related to geographical source, sex or age of the larvae.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".