The relative importance of number, duration and intensity of cold stress events in determining survival and energetics of an overwintering insect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The relationship between abiotic stress and fitness in an individual is usually described by the intensity and duration of stress. Yet in natural systems, variability in abiotic stress is common. Since individuals have physiological and fitness responses to single bouts of stress, frequency of stress may also determine the lifetime success of an organism. However, the majority of laboratory studies have focused only on the effects of single stress events. We investigated the relative importance of stress parameters including duration, intensity and number of cold events on the short‐term physiology and long‐term fitness in the freeze‐avoiding eastern spruce budworm Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Clemens). We exposed overwintering 2nd‐instar larvae of C. fumiferana to −5 °C, −10 °C, −15 °C or −20 °C, for either a single exposure of 120 h or repeated 12 h exposures (3, 6 or 10 exposures). Changes in short‐term physiology were quantified by cryoprotectant content, energetic stores and supercooling point. Long‐term fitness effects were measured by rearing individuals after overwintering and recording successful eclosion as adults, development time from 2nd instar to adult, and adult size. We found that long‐term survival of C. fumiferana was most strongly affected by the number of low‐temperature stress events rather than intensity or duration, despite increased investment into cryoprotection at the expense of glycogen reserves. Sublethal measures such as adult size were unaffected by low‐temperature stress. Thus, we show that frequency of stress is an important, yet frequently neglected, parameter in the study of the effects of abiotic stress. The responses we documented here suggest that frequency of stress may be an additional important parameter for modelling the effects of abiotic stress on populations.
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".