Elimination of<i>Wolbachia</i>from<i>Urolepis rufipes</i>(Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) with Heat and Antibiotic Treatments: Implications for Host Reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular analyses using ftsZ and wsp primers identified infections of type-A Wolbachia bacteria in populations of Urolepis rufipes (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae), a potential biocontrol agent for pest flies (Diptera: Muscidae) in livestock confinements. Incidence of infections ranged from 10 to 45% for three field populations and 100% in a laboratory colony. Provision of adult wasps with sugar water containing 50 μg mL–1 tetracycline hydrochloride, or continuous rearing at 34±0.5°C eliminated Wolbachia from experimental populations after four and six generations, respectively. Results were similar for experimental crosses between infected parents, between uninfected parents, and between infected female and uninfected male parents. Embryonic mortality was less than 5% for the F1 generation, which had an adult sex ratio of 2♀:1♂. In contrast, experimental crosses between uninfected female and infected male parents were associated with an embryonic mortality of about 20% and produced 37% fewer F1 adults. However, because of an F1 sex ratio of almost 0♀:1♂,?this latter cross produced an overall higher number of F1 males. These combined results reflect elements of both male development (MD) type cytoplasmic incompatibility (CI) and female mortality (FM) type CI Wolbachia. MD type CI Wolbachia in incompatible crosses causes haploidization of fertilized (i.e., female) eggs. The resultant haploid eggs develop into males so that more males are produced in incompatible versus compatible crosses. FM type CI produces fewer offspring and a male-biased F1 generation caused by enhanced mortality of female embryos. We speculate that the fate of fertilized eggs - haploidization versus mortality - may reflect differences in bacterial densities.
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".