Induced plant defence and the evolution of counter-defences in herbivores
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine how induced plant defences affect the evolution of resistance in herbivores (i.e. the ability to overcome plant defences) compared with constitutive defence strategies. Since resistance of herbivores may evolve as a result of major monogenic and/or quantitative (polygenic or gene amplification) genetic sources, and the selective pressure imposed by plant defences affects the rate of evolution of each genetic source of resistance, we incorporate both into a model of herbivore evolution. We combine Mendelian single-locus and quantitative genetic models with a logistic population growth model based on an empirical plant–herbivore system. Induced defences may delay the evolution of both quantitative and major gene resistance and thus depress herbivore population size for more than 50 herbivore generations longer than constitutive defences. This increased longevity in the effectiveness of plant defence is associated with the production of substantially less plant defence over the long term, hence maximizing the benefit to cost ratio from the plant’s perspective.
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.
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 it