MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental evidence for the phenotypic impact of admixture between wild and biocontrol Asian ladybird (<i>Harmonia axyridis</i>) involved in the European invasion

2011· article· en· W1875858788 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Turgeon, Ahmed Tayeh, Benoît Facon, Éric Lombaert, Patrick De Clercq, Nick Berkvens, Jonathan G. Lundgren, Arnaud Estoup

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evolutionary Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheAgropolis Fondation
KeywordsBiologyHarmonia axyridisInvasive speciesHybridBiological pest controlIntroduced speciesHybrid zoneCoccinellidaeZoologyEcologyGeneGeneticsGene flowPredatorPredationBotanyGenetic variation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybridization can fuel evolutionary processes during biological invasions. The harlequin ladybird Harmonia axyridis has long been used as a biocontrol agent before the species became invasive worldwide. Previous analysis based on microsatellite data has shown that European invasive populations bear traces of admixture between an eastern North American source, which is at the origin of the worldwide invasion, and biocontrol strains used in Europe. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that this early admixture event may have fostered the European invasion by impacting on the phenotypes of wild European populations. Mean life history traits of experimental F(1) hybrids are compared with pure parental sources and wild European crosses. Our results reveal a biased impact whereby North American beetles benefitted from being admixed with European biocontrol strains. Resemblance between experimental hybrids and wild European invasive crosses further suggests a long-lasting effect of admixture that may still be at work and fostering invasiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations62
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evolutionary BiologySame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207