Parasitoid load affects plant fitness in a tritrophic system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Plants attacked by herbivorous insects emit volatile compounds that attract predators or parasitoids of the herbivores. Plant fitness increases when these herbivorous insects are parasitized by solitary parasitoids, but whether gregarious koinobiont parasitoids also confer a benefit to plant fitness has been disputed. We investigated the relationship between parasitoid load of the gregarious Cotesia glomerata (L.) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), food consumption by larvae of their host Pieris brassicae L. (Lepidoptera: Pieridae), and seed production in a host plant, Brassica nigra L. (Brassicaceae), in a greenhouse experiment. Plants damaged by caterpillars containing single parasitoid broods produced a similar amount of seeds as undamaged control plants and produced significantly more seeds than plants with unparasitized caterpillars feeding on them. Increasing the parasitoid load to levels likely resulting from superparasitization, feeding by parasitized caterpillars was significantly negatively correlated with plant seed production. Higher parasitoid brood sizes were negatively correlated with pupal weight of Cotesia glomerata, revealing scramble competition leading to a fitness trade‐off for the parasitoid. Our results suggest that in this tritrophic system plant fitness is higher when the gregarious parasitoid deposits a single brood into its herbivorous host. A prediction following from these results is that plants benefit from recruiting parasitoids when superparasitization is prevented. This is supported by our previous results on down‐regulation of synomone production when Brassica oleracea was fed on by parasitized caterpillars of P. brassicae. We conclude that variable parasitoid loads in gregarious koinobiont parasitoids largely explain existing controversies about the putative benefit of recruiting these parasitoids for plant reproduction.
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) | 0.001 | 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".