Host‐plant mediated interactions between two aphid species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Herbivory induces numerous defence reactions in plants, which can in turn alter the plant quality for insects. The potato aphid, Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas), and the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (both Hemiptera: Aphididae), are two important sympatric potato pests in northern France. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a previous infestation of a potato plant, Solanum tuberosum L. (Solanaceae), by M. persicae or M. euphorbiae on the host attractiveness, feeding behaviour, and biological performance of M. euphorbiae subsequently colonising the plant. The preference of aphids was studied with a dual‐choice olfactometer and their feeding behaviour was monitored using the electrical penetration graph technique. Their biological performance was assessed by an in planta bioassay. Non‐infested plants were significantly more attractive to M. euphorbiae than plants pre‐infested by conspecific individuals. Aphids showed a strong reduction in the time spent ingesting phloem sap when feeding on pre‐infested plants. The biological performance of M. euphorbiae was not affected by previous conspecific infestation. Conversely, M. euphorbiae feeding behaviour was not affected on plants previously infested by M. persicae but aphids were more attracted to and had a faster population build‐up on those plants. Our results show that plant response and its effect on M. euphorbiae differed depending on the aphid species previously feeding on the potato plant. This variability in plant response could lead to competition or facilitation between aphids temporally and spatially separated, and promote dispersal under field conditions.
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) | 0.002 | 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".