Induced tree response to herbivory influences the foraging preference and performance of a conifer‐defoliating sawfly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Herbivory often alters the growth and development of woody plants and can thereby render hosts less susceptible to subsequent herbivores. We carried out field surveys and experiments to investigate how previous herbivory influences adult egg lay, larval feeding preference, and associated survival of the yellowheaded spruce sawfly, Pikonema alaskensis (Rohwer) (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae), within crowns of black spruce, Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton et al. (Pinaceae). Pikonema alaskensis females laid nearly twice as many eggs, and late‐instar larvae consumed nearly twice as much foliar biomass, on undefoliated vs. defoliated branches. The major factor driving the lower incidence of egg lay on defoliated branches was a significant reduction in the availability of preferred size classes of shoots. In general, adult females preferred medium‐sized shoots, whereas late instars preferred large shoots; previous defoliation generally decreased the availability of medium and large shoots. In a field bioassay, late‐instar survival generally declined with increasing defoliation, which again corresponded to significant reductions in shoot length on defoliated branches. The tendency of P. alaskensis to avoid shoots on severely defoliated branches is likely to increase the time lag between herbivory and the feedback effects of induction and could thus contribute to fluctuations in sawfly population density during outbreak. Our results differ from numerous past studies of closely related diprionid sawflies in conifers, most of which have reported weak or positive effects of previous herbivory on host susceptibility; we attribute the observed responses of spruce to the unusual sawfly feeding preference of P. alaskensis for developing conifer foliage.
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".