Fitness of two phenotypes of Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coccinellid H. axyridis shows considerable intraspecific variability of elytral patterns. In this paper, we suggest that a genotype that confers a specific pattern of elytra could also confer other specific autecological attributes. The aim of this paper is to compare fitness parameters of two phenotypes (aulica and nigra). Aulica is a common morph characterized by two light red areas that nearly cover the whole elytra, leaving a narrow black border, whereas nigra is completely black; the latter is a rare morph that was naturally obtained from mass cultures. Intraspecific differences occur between H. axyridis phenotypes. The aulica phenotype is more voracious than nigra. Consumption rate of males is higher in aulica than in nigra, but there is no difference for females. Larval biomass of aulica is generally higher than that of nigra. The maximum body-weights reached by larval instars and adults are significantly higher for aulica. Aulica also has greater longevity and reproductive capacity. Only life stage duration of eggs and pre-pupae differ between the two phenotypes. Nigra shows lower fecundity and fertility. Our study showed that the strong differences in phenotype traits of the coccinellid H. axyridis could affect its fitness.
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 | 0.001 | 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".