MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980232380 · doi:10.1139/z02-159

Sex differences in melanotic encapsulation responses (immunocompetence) in the damselfly <i>Lestes forcipatus</i> Rambur

2002· article· en· W1980232380 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Christopher P Yourth, Mark R. Forbes, Robert L. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyDamselflySexual dimorphismImmunocompetenceZoologyEcologyAcariOdonataImmune systemImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A few studies have shown that male and female invertebrates differ in immunity and that these differences appear related to differences in sexual dimorphism and gender differences in life histories. Melanotic encapsulation of foreign objects in insects is one form of immunity. The damselfly Lestes forcipatus Rambur is moderately sexually dimorphic, and much is known about patterns of mass gain in congeners relating to differences in life history between males and females. In this study, females were more immunoresponsive than males under controlled temperatures, following emergence, and at a time when parasitic mites were challenging these hosts. However, males and females that overlapped in mass at emergence did not differ in their immune responses. Males in better condition at emergence were more immunoresponsive than lighter males, but this relation was not found in females. Sex differences in immune expression may have implications for how females versus males are able to deal with challenges from parasites, under varying environmental 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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207