Abundance of leafminers and leaf area loss by chewing herbivores in hybrids between<i>Quercus crispula</i>and<i>Quercus dentata</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined responses of phytophagous insects to hybrids between Quercus crispula Blume and Quercus dentata Thunberg in a natural population in northern Japan. The abundance of leafminers and leaf area loss by chewing insects in hybrids were intermediate between those in the parental species (additive mode), close to those of either of the parental species (dominance mode), or similar to those of both parental species (no difference). Hybrids were neither more susceptible nor resistant to the insect herbivores we monitored. In Phyllonorycter (Gracillariidae) species, which are specialized to either of the parental oak species, the mortality of sap-feeding early instar larvae did not differ between hybrids and the parental species. The abundance of four leafminer taxa was correlated with environmental conditions (i.e., distance from the coastal edge of the forest or the timing of budbreak) as well as genetic factors.
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".