Intraguild predation by the generalist predator<i>Dicyphus hesperus</i>on the parasitoid<i>Encarsia formosa</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predation was measured in the laboratory by Dicyphus hesperus females on patches of greenhouse whitefly (Trialeurodes vaporariorum) pupae. The patches contained different proportions of unparasitized pupae and those parastisized as nymphs by Encarsia formosa. Dicyphus hesperus fed readily on parasitized pupae and the number of parasitized pupae consumed increased with the proportion available indicating a capacity for intraguild predation. However, D. hesperus females did not display a preference for feeding on parasitized pupae versus unparasitized pupae. Dicyphus hesperus adults were released at three densities into greenhouse enclosures containing tomato plants harbouring greenhouse whitefly and immature E. formosa. Numbers of killed and parasitized whitefly nymphs and pupae and the total number of healthy whitefly were compared among Dicyphus density treatments. On upper leaves, the amount of predation on whitefly nymphs was higher at the highest predator density than at the lower density or in enclosures where D. hesperus was not released. On lower leaves, the number of parasitized pupae was lowest with the highest predator density indicating a negative effect of intraguild predation by D. hesperus on E. formosa. Despite this, Dicyphus density did not affect the density of whitefly in the presence of E. formosa. The results are discussed as they relate to concurrent use of D. hesperus and E. formosa for regulation of greenhouse whitefly populations.
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".