We do not select, nor are we choosy: reproductive biology of Strepsiptera (Insecta)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cryptic entomophagous parasitoids in the order Strepsiptera exhibit specific adaptations to each of the 34 families that they parasitize, offering rich opportunities for the study of male–female conflict. We address the compelling question as to how the diversity of Strepsiptera (where cryptic speciation is common) arose. Studying 13 strepsipteran families, including fossil taxa, we explore the genitalic structures of males, the free-living females of the Mengenillidia (suborder), and the endoparasitic females of the Stylopidia (suborder). Inferring from similarity between aedeagi of males either between congeners, heterogeners, or between species within the same taxonomic family, the same of which is true of the cephalothoraces of females, we predict that male–female conflict and a co-evolutionary morphological arms race between sexes is not likely to exist in most species of Strepsiptera. We then review the non-genitalic structures that play a role during sexual communication, and present details of copulatory behaviour. We conclude that Strepsiptera fall within the synchronous sensory exploitation model where short-lived males take advantage of a pre-existing sensory system involving pheromone signals emitted by females.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".