Effect of age on reproductive attributes of an aphidophagous ladybird, <i>Cheilomenes sexmaculata</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effect of both male and female age was investigated on certain reproductive attributes, viz. mating incidence, mating duration, fecundity, percent egg viability, ratio of reproductive and non‐reproductive periods and reproductive rate, of an aphidophagous ladybird, Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius). Females started mating at the age of 8 hours post‐emergence (PE) and males at the age of 2 days PE. Mating in the laboratory was a male‐dominated phenomenon. The mating duration and reproductive rate of 10‐day‐old females when mated with males of varying ages increased up to the male age of 60 days, and thereafter decreased, whereas, fecundity, egg viability and ratio of reproductive and non‐reproductive periods increased up to the male age of 50 days, and thereafter declined. However, when females of varying ages were mated with 10‐day‐old males, fecundity and reproductive rate increased up to 40 days of female age, respectively, then decreased. The ratio of reproductive and non‐reproductive periods increased with increasing age of females. Mating age for optimal reproductive output was 10J50‐day‐old males and NE to 40‐day‐old females. Reproductive cessation in males was recorded after 50 days PE, whereas in females at the age of 40 days PE. Higher mating durations lead to elevated reproductive rates. Delay in the reproductive phase was positively correlated with longevity. The results of this study may aid mass multiplication of this ladybird by identifying and promoting usage of adults of optimal age. Our results also enhance our understanding of the effect of age on reproductive attributes in ladybirds.
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".