Gall size determines the structure of the <i>Rabdophaga strobiloides</i> host–parasitoid community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. 1. The relationship between gall size and mortality of the willow pinecone gall midge Rabdophaga strobiloides (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) was examined by determining the fate of all galls in a 30‐ha area in central Alberta, Canada over 4 years. It was found that gall size has a large effect on the type and intensity of mortality experienced by the gall midge, and consequently this factor has the potential to influence the dynamics of the host–parasitoid interaction through the creation of phenotypic refuges. 2. Total midge mortality ranged from 51% to 78% over the course of the study and was dominated by parasitism by Torymus cecidomyiae (Hymenoptera: Torymidae) and Gastrancistrus sp. (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) as well as predation by birds. Gall size had a strong, non‐linear effect on the attack rates of each of these natural enemies. 3. Birds attacked the smallest size classes. Torymus cecidomyiae preferentially attacked medium diameter galls and thus avoided predation by birds in smaller galls. Gastrancistrus sp. preferentially attacked the largest galls and consequently suffered lower rates of predation by both T. cecidomyiae and birds. 4. This study emphasises the importance of understanding the interactions among mortality factors in order to describe adequately the susceptibility of R. strobiloides to parasitism and predation, and ultimately its population dynamics.
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".