Calling behaviour of the potato aphid <i>Macrosiphum euphorbiae</i> oviparae under laboratory and field conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. 1. The calling behaviour of virgin oviparae of the potato aphid Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas) (Homoptera: Aphididae) was studied at three different constant temperatures under laboratory conditions. The mean age of calling for the first time decreased with a decrease in temperature from 2.9 days at 20 °C to 2.1 days at 10 °C. At all temperature regimes, the mean onset time of calling advanced from about 5 to 3 h after the onset of the photophase, and the mean time spent calling increased by > 4 h over the 8 days. 2. Cohorts of oviparae were also observed at two different periods in late summer–early autumn in the field, to examine the effects of fluctuating abiotic conditions (temperatures, wind velocity, rain) and age on calling behaviour. As under constant laboratory conditions, the mean age of calling for the first time declined with declining temperature, from 3.7 days in early September to 1.6 days at the end of September. Age‐related changes in the mean onset time of calling and the mean time spent calling were much less evident under field conditions, due to the inhibitory effects of low temperatures, high winds, and rain on female calling activity. 3. The results are discussed within the context of reproductive success and address a previously proposed hypothesis suggesting that species‐specific calling windows may serve as a reproductive isolating mechanism for sympatric aphid species.
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".