MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Size‐selective oviposition by parasitoids and the evolution of life‐history timing in hosts: fixed preferences vs frequency‐dependent host selection

2000· article· en· W1970294670 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Robert McGregor, Bernard D. Roitberg

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParasitoidBiologyLarvaHost (biology)Selection (genetic algorithm)PopulationLife history theoryEcologyLife historyZoologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of size‐selective oviposition behaviour by parasitoids on the evolution of life‐history timing in their hosts was examined using an optimization model of a two‐stage life history similar to a genetic algorithm. Host populations with varying durations of early‐larval development were subjected to selection in scenarios where parasitoids had fixed preferences for oviposition on late‐stage larvae, or those where parasitoid attack was dependent on the relative frequencies of the two life stages present in the population. Fixed preference for oviposition on late‐stage larvae caused positive directional selection on the duration of early‐larval development. Surviving individuals remained for as long as possible in the first stage of development in order to avoid parasitoid attack. Frequency‐dependent parasitoid attack, in contrast, caused maintenance of variation in the duration of early‐larval development. The influence of the fitness payoffs of different life stages on the plasticity of size‐selective oviposition behaviour is discussed, as are possible implications of the model results for parasitoid‐host 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207