The effects of tannic acid on the fitness-related traits of Lymantria dispar L. larvae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we investigated the effects of tannic acid on fitness-related traits in gypsy moth larvae from two differently adapted populations. Thirty two full-sib families from oak (suitable host plant, Quercus population), and twenty six full-sib families from locust-tree (unsuitable host plant, Robinia population) forests were reared on artificial diets with or without a 5% tannic acid supplement. Tannic acid shortened the duration of larval development till the 4th instar in the Robinia population, and decreased the mass of larvae from both Quercus and Robinia populations. Local adaptation was not recorded for any of the examined traits. In general, regardless of population origin, genetic variation (broad-sense heritability) was higher in larvae fed on the diet containing tannic acid than in larvae fed on the control diet. Variability of phenotypic plasticity was significant for the examined traits, except for larval duration traits in Quercus larvae, pointing to the potential of gypsy moth larvae from both populations for the evolution of adaptive plastic responses to new environmental conditions and the presence of stressors. Genetic correlations between the environments were positive and significantly different from ?one? and accordingly, do not represent constraint for the evolution of plasticity.
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".