Does spruce budworm (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) rearing diet influence larval parasitism?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Artificial diet is commonly used to rear the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), in the laboratory. While its effect on spruce budworm performance is relatively well studied, no information exists about the influence of rearing diet on larval parasitism. In this study, spruce budworm larvae reared in the laboratory on artificial diet or balsam fir, Abies balsamea (Linnaeus) Miller (Pinaceae), foliage were introduced in the field to compare parasitism. Additionally, a laboratory choice test was conducted with the larval parasitoid Tranosema rostrale (Brischke) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). No significant influence of spruce budworm rearing diet on parasitism in the field was found. However, in the laboratory, T. rostrale attacked significantly more foliage-fed larvae. We conclude that even if initial differences in parasitism may exist between diet-fed and foliage-fed larvae in the laboratory, spruce budworm larvae reared on artificial diet can be used in field studies investigating parasitism of wild spruce budworm populations without concern that the food source would affect parasitism.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".