A natural population of the butterfly Eurema hecabe with Wolbachia-induced female-biased sex ratio not by feminization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In butterflies, the adult sex ratio observed in the field is usually male-biased, although the sex ratio of their progeny is 1:1. This is due to the higher motility and larger behavioral range of males than females. As expected, the sex ratio of Eurema hecabe butterflies collected at 6 localities throughout Japan was male-biased. However, in Tsukuba, located in the central part of Japan, the sex ratio was found to be biased toward females. Their progeny reared in the laboratory also exhibited a female-biased sex ratio. A single strain of Wolbachia is considered to be the cause of the sex-ratio distortion, because antibiotic treatment reversed the sex ratio to 1:1, and only a single nucleotide sequence of wsp, a highly variable Wolbachia gene, was detected by molecular analysis. Cytogenetic analysis excluded the possibility of feminization as the underlying mechanism. In addition, when the wild-caught females that had already mated in nature were treated with antibiotics before oviposition, egg-hatch rates were extremely low, suggesting that the same Wolbachia strain also caused cytoplasmic incompatibility. Our findings suggest the possibility that a single strain of Wolbachia induces 2 distinct reproductive manipulations in the same host.
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".