Carry over effects of the entomopathogen <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i> ssp. Kurstaki on <i>Choristoneura fumiferana</i> (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) progeny under various stressful environmental conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the present study, we documented the lethal and sublethal effects of the entomopathogen Btk on spruce budworm and its progeny under various environmental conditions. We hypothesized that aerial spray of Bacillus thuringiensis ssp. kurstaki ( Btk ) could affect the biological performance of the surviving spruce budworm ( Choristoneura fumiferana Clem.) populations and their progenies and that Btk sublethal effects could be widened by other types of stress (i.e. temperature conditions and changes in food suitability from year to year). The results from a 3‐year field experiment indicated that Btk treatments decreased the fitness of the surviving larvae whatever the prevailing temperature and nutritional conditions. The detrimental Btk effects on the parental generation carried over to the offspring. The percent of egg hatch and first‐instar survival were negatively affected by Btk whatever other stress spruce budworm parents underwent. The present study also highlighted the fact that the effects of temperature and nutritional stress suffered by the parents could carry over to the next generation. Balsam fir flowering, which provided larvae with pollen rich in nitrogen, favoured both the parental generation and the fitness of their offspring. Spruce budworm mothers allocated to their progenies large amounts of energy reserves (triglycerides and glycogen) that greatly enhanced the survival of the early stages. Egg hatch and the survival of first‐instar larval progeny were drastically affected when their parents had reduced larval growth as a result of exposure to cool temperatures that had desynchronized insect and bud phenology. Budworm mothers submitted to negative impacts of previous defoliation allocated low amounts of energy reserves to their progeny. This lack of energy associated with unfavourable temperature conditions (i.e. high temperatures in late summer and in early fall and an extended cool period in spring) drastically reduced survival of diapausing second‐instar larvae. These results highlight the importance of considering the various sources of stress when attempting to evaluate the impact of a control agent on an insect pest population and its progenies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".