Pea aphid,<i>Acyrthosiphon pisum</i>, cornicle ontogeny as an adaptation to differential predation risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aphids possess unique anatomical structures called cornicles through which a defensive secretion containing alarm pheromone is often emitted when a predator attacks an aphid. The levels of alarm pheromone in cornicle droplets from the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum (Harris), vary considerably during development; however, it is not clear how the length of the cornicle changes during ontogeny. The length of the cornicle relative to the lengths of other body structures may have profound effects on aphid defense and alarm signal diffusion. Using previously published morphological measurements of pea aphids and observing interactions between pea aphids and multicolored Asian ladybird beetles, Harmonia axyridis Pallas, it was observed that pea aphid cornicles elongate proportionally more than other body parts during the first four instars, when alarm-pheromone levels have peaked, than during the fifth (adult) instar, when pheromone levels decline. Pea aphids also are more likely to emit cornicle droplets and daub them onto a predator when the cornicles are undergoing such rapid growth. We suggest that because of a high risk of predation, rapid cornicle growth in juveniles has evolved both for individual defense and for the inclusive fitness benefits of alarm signaling.
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 | 0.001 | 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".