MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052434274 · doi:10.4039/n06-803

Short life cycles in insects and mites

2006· article· en· W2052434274 on OpenAlexaff
H. V. Danks

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
FundersEntomological Society of America
KeywordsBiologyFecundityEcologyTaxonPhylogenetic treeLongevityHabitatPopulation dynamicsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Under favourable conditions some species of insects and mites complete development very quickly. This paper considers species with a mean minimum generation time of 15 days or less and tabulates developmental data for many sample species. Such species belong chiefly to a limited number of taxa of small size, notably aphids and several families of mites and parasitoid Hymenoptera. Characteristics of these taxa are reviewed. Even in families containing many species with rapid life cycles, normally many other species lack such rapid development. Very short life cycles depend on phylogeny, strain, rapid development in all stages, small size, rich food, and other habitat features including high temperatures. Within this framework, life cycles are accelerated by reducing elements requiring the investment of resources (size, fecundity, longevity, structural complexity), eliminating instars and even life stages, accelerating development (through lower requirements especially of heat, heat gain by adaptations such as basking, and rapid reproduction), and choosing the most suitable habitats and microhabitats from those available. Mean minimum generation times in insects and mites with coincident adaptations of this sort can be as short as 4 days. Notwithstanding the advantages of rapid development in maximizing the intrinsic rate of natural increase (and hence fitness), most species cannot achieve the highest rates of development. They are constrained not only by resources and intrinsic physiological or phylogenetic patterns but also by variability of conditions and seasonality that can be survived only by interpolating delays or resistant stages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207