ALLOCATION PATTERNS OF ORGANIC NITROGEN AND MINERAL NUTRIENTS WITHIN STEM GALLS OF<i>DIPLOLEPIS SPINOSA</i>AND<i>DIPLOLEPIS TRIFORMA</i>(HYMENOPTERA: CYNIPIDAE) ON WILD ROSES (ROSACEAE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Concentrations of organic N and minerals Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Na, P, and S in tissues of galls induced by Diplolepis spinosa (Ashmead) and Diplolepis triforma Shorthouse and Ritchie in growth and maturation phases were compared with those in ungalled tissues of host roses and tissues distal to galls to increase our understanding of nutritional relationships between gall wasps and their host plants ( Rosa blanda Aiton and Rosa acicularis Lindley, respectively). Concentrations of N and most mineral nutrients were lower in galls than in ungalled tissues, and tissues distal to galls, suggesting that cynipids regulate rather than concentrate nutrients within their galls. Concentrations of mineral nutrients within the larvae of both species of inducers, and their parasitoids, were determined for galls in the maturation phase. Absolute amounts of most minerals in gall tissues were positively correlated with the number of inhabitants, indicating that control of translocation of nutrients to galls occurs on a per inducer basis. Concentrations of nutrients in mature larvae of parasitoids were the same as concentrations in mature larvae of inducers, which explains why parasitism of gall inducers had no influence on the concentrations or amounts of nutrients in galls. Galls of D . triforma had greater concentrations of N and most mineral nutrients than did galls of D . spinosa . Likewise, larvae of D . triforma , and the parasitoids feeding on D . triforma , had greater concentrations of N and mineral nutrients than did larvae of D . spinosa and its parasitoids. Galls of both species had different concentrations of nutrients compared with ungalled tissues and tissues distal to the galls. Galls of both species also had seasonal decreases in concentrations of nutrients. Parasitoids of each species of inducer were generally similar in mineral composition to their hosts.
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) | 0.000 | 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".