Possible aversion learning in the Pacific Coast wireworm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of carbon dioxide and the induction of morbidity on aversion learning in larvae of the Pacific Coast wireworm Limonius canus LeConte (Coleoptera: Elateridae) are discussed. Wireworms preconditioned by exposing them one or four times to odour of Tefluthrin 20SC and Dividend XLRTA [Syngenta Crop Protection (Canada), Inc., Canada] during the induction of temporary morbidity subsequently contact tefluthrin‐treated wheat seeds in soil bioassays for as long as naïve (i.e. not preconditioned) larvae but are repelled four to five‐fold more frequently by Dividend‐treated seeds in soil bioassays than naïve wireworms, suggesting that wireworms are capable of associating a novel odour (i.e. Dividend) with morbidity but require a minimum of 10–15 min subsequent contact time with treated seeds before being repelled. Wireworms preconditioned by exposure to peppermint odour during the induction of morbidity are not subsequently repelled by peppermint odour in soil bioassays, suggesting that wireworms are either not capable of aversion learning or that the presence of a CO 2 source and/or a suitable host plant may override a negative cue (i.e. peppermint odour). In studies conducted in the absence of soil, a host plant and CO 2 production, wireworms are repelled slightly by droplets of 1.0% but not 0.1% peppermint oil. Previous exposure to peppermint odour or contact with peppermint oil‐treated filter paper during one induction of morbidity does not increase the repellency of wireworms to 1.0% peppermint oil significantly. Repellency to 1.0% peppermint oil is almost eliminated when morbidity is induced five times in the absence of peppermint odour but is restored when peppermint odour is present during preconditioning. These findings suggest that wireworm sensitivity to repellent compounds decreases when repeatedly made moribund, although the results are not sufficient to conclude that wireworms are capable of associative learning.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".