Oviposition strategies employed by the western spruce budworm: tests of predictions from the phylogenetic constraints hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract 1 Predictions from the Phylogenetic Constraints Hypothesis were tested for the first time in an eruptive forest Lepidopteran species, the western spruce budworm. 2 In previous work, we established that western spruce budworm females exhibit oviposition preferences with regard to tree age, tree vigour and host species. However, there was no evidence to support a link between oviposition preference and larval performance, which supports the Phylogenetic Constraints Hypothesis. 3 Our preference data led us to test whether female budworms use oviposition strategies to select the sites where they lay their egg masses. Our experiments were designed to make direct comparisons between latent and eruptive insect herbivores with respect to two oviposition behaviours: egg retention and avoidance of conspecifics. This type of research has not previously been conducted on any eruptive forest Lepidopteran. 4 Female budworms retained eggs instead of laying them on less preferred hosts in two of three experiments, but the percentage of eggs they retained was significantly less compared to latent insect herbivores. 5 In addition, female budworms actively avoided oviposition in areas with the highest density of conspecific egg masses, but they laid egg masses in all the other locations provided. This contrasts with the pattern seen in latent insect herbivores, which consistently avoid laying their eggs near any sites already used by conspecifics. 6 Our research indicates that there are extreme differences between latent and eruptive insect herbivores with respect to egg retention and avoidance of conspecifics, thus supporting the Phylogenetic Constraints Hypothesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".