MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Density dependent population growth of the two‐spotted spider mite, <i>Tetranychus urticae</i> , on the host plant <i>Leonurus cardiaca</i>

2003· article· en· W2054914158 on OpenAlexafffund
Karin A. Rotem, Anurag A. Agrawal

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSpider miteTetranychus urticaeBiologyPopulation densitySpiderPopulationIntraspecific competitionMiteFecundityDensity dependenceBotanyEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We observed Tetranychus urticae (Koch), a polyphagous spider mite herbivore, on Leonurus cardiaca (L.) at several sites in eastern North America at variable density, ranging from extremely dense to sparse. To understand the nature of T. urticae 's population dynamics we experimentally manipulated population densities on L. cardiaca and assessed per capita growth after 1 to 2 generations in laboratory and field experiments. In particular, we took a ‘bottom‐up’ approach, manipulating both plant size and quality to examine effects on mite dynamics. Per capita growth was strongly dependent on the initial density of the mite population. Spider mite populations grew (1) in a negatively density dependent manner on small plants and (2) unhindered by density dependence on large plants. Mean per capita growth was 59% higher on small plants compared to large plants, irrespective of mite density. We also found evidence for density dependent induced susceptibility to spider mites in small plants and density dependent induced resistance in large plants. Hence, spider mite populations grew at a relatively fast rate on small plants, and this was associated with negative density dependence due to factors that depress population growth, such as food deterioration or limitation. On large plants, spider mite populations grew at a relatively slow rate, apparently resulting in herbivore densities that may not have been high enough to cause intraspecific competition or other forms of negative density dependence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207