Do Offspring of Insects Feeding on Defoliation-Resistant Trees Have Better Biological Performance When Exposed to Nutritionally-Imbalanced Food?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
White spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) trees that are resistant or susceptible to spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.)) attack were identified in a southern Quebec plantation. Due to high mortality-induced selective pressures imposed by resistant trees on spruce budworm larvae, insects that survive on resistant trees exhibited greater biological performance than those on susceptible trees. We tested the hypothesis that this better biological performance is maintained across generations when progeny were subjected to nutritional stress. We collected pupae from resistant and susceptible trees (phenotype). Adults were reared under controlled laboratory conditions. Progeny were subsequently reared on two types of artificial diet (high vs. low quality). Low quality diet simulated food quality deterioration during outbreak conditions. Results confirmed that surviving insects collected from resistant trees have better performance than those from susceptible trees. Offspring performance (pupal mass, developmental time) was affected only by diet quality. These results suggest that adaptive advantages that would be acquired from parents fed on resistant trees are lost when progeny are exposed to nutritionally-imbalanced food, but the effects persist when larvae are fed a balanced diet. Offspring mortality, fecundity and fertility were positively influenced by parental origin (tree phenotype).
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".