Sex biased intra‐tree oviposition site selection and larval foraging behavior of a specialist herbivore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Heterogeneity in the quality of oviposition and feeding sites within plants can significantly influence the distribution and abundance of herbivorous insects, but remains poorly understood. Field surveys and a manipulative study were conducted to evaluate the influence of variation within the crown of black spruce, Picea mariana (Mill.) B.S.P. (Pinaceae), on adult oviposition and larval feeding behavior of yellowheaded spruce sawfly, Pikonema alaskensis Rohwer (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae). Most eggs were laid in the mid to lower crown of 1.5–2 m tall trees. However, most of the few eggs that were laid in the upper crown (i.e., whorl 2) were female. Fourth and fifth instars dispersed acropetally, from the mid and lower to the upper crown, causing high defoliation in the upper crown. Late‐instar females were generally more abundant than males on the leader, the most apical shoot on a tree where eggs and early instars rarely occurred, strongly suggesting that more females than males disperse acropetally. This hypothesis was supported in a manipulative experiment, where only 15–20% of larvae in all‐male broods, but almost three‐quarters of larvae in mixed broods, dispersed to the upper crown. To our knowledge, this is only the second study to explicitly demonstrate preferential allocation of progeny sex through oviposition site selection by a herbivorous insect, and the first study to unambiguously demonstrate sex‐biased dispersal by the juveniles of an insect whose adult females can fly. This study emphasizes the important role of intra‐plant variation in shaping both oviposition site selection and the dispersal behavior of juvenile phytophagous insects within their hosts, and suggests that sex‐biased foraging behaviors may be necessary for some insects to accommodate the respective needs of immature females and males within heterogeneous host plants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".