Sources of variation in the interaction between three cereal aphids (Hemiptera: Aphididae) and wheat (Poaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relative contributions of host plant, herbivore species and clone to variation in the interaction between cereal aphids and wheat were investigated using five clones each of three species, Rhopalosiphum padi (Linnaeus), Sitobion avenae (Fabricius) and Schizaphis graminum (Rondani), on seedlings of two cultivars of Triticum aestivum L. and one cultivar of Triticum durum Desf. More individuals and biomass of R. padi than of the other two species were produced on seedlings. The three wheat cultivars lost similar amounts of biomass as a result of infestation by aphids, with the amount lost depending on aphid species: S. avenae caused the lowest loss in biomass. Variation in aphid biomass production was due mostly to differences among aphid species (70%), less to the interaction between wheat type and aphid species (7%), and least to aphid clone (1%). The specific impact of the aphids on the plants ranged from 1.7 to 3.7 mg of plant biomass lost per mg of aphid biomass gained, being lowest for R. padi and highest for S. graminum. Variation in plant biomass lost to herbivory was due mostly to unknown sources of error (95%), probably phenotypic differences among individual seedlings, with 3% due to aphid species and none attributable to aphid clone. For these aphid-plant interactions, differences among aphid clones within species contributed little to variation in aphid and plant productivity; therefore, a small sample of clones was adequate for quantifying the interactions. Furthermore, one clone of each species maintained in the laboratory for about 200 parthenogenetic generations was indistinguishable from clones collected recently from the field.
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 | 0.001 | 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".