MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular detection of trophic links in a complex insect host–parasitoid food web

2011· article· en· W1897639738 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Hrček, Scott E. Miller, Donаld L. J. Quicke, M. Alex Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Ecology Resources · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyParasitoidTrophic levelHost (biology)InsectFood webEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously, host-parasitoid links have been unveiled almost exclusively by time-intensive rearing, while molecular methods were used only in simple agricultural host-parasitoid systems in the form of species-specific primers. Here, we present a general method for the molecular detection of these links applied to a complex caterpillar-parasitoid food web from tropical rainforest of Papua New Guinea. We DNA barcoded hosts, parasitoids and their tissue remnants and matched the sequences to our extensive library of local species. We were thus able to match 87% of host sequences and 36% of parasitoid sequences to species and infer subfamily or family in almost all cases. Our analysis affirmed 93 hitherto unknown trophic links between 37 host species from a wide range of Lepidoptera families and 46 parasitoid species from Hymenoptera and Diptera by identifying DNA sequences for both the host and the parasitoid involved in the interaction. Molecular detection proved especially useful in cases where distinguishing host species in caterpillar stage was difficult morphologically, or when the caterpillar died during rearing. We have even detected a case of extreme parasitoid specialization in a pair of Choreutis species that do not differ in caterpillar morphology and ecology. Using the molecular approach outlined here leads to better understanding of parasitoid host specificity, opens new possibilities for rapid surveys of food web structure and allows inference of species associations not already anticipated.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations123
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Ecology ResourcesSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207