Intraguild predation between the aphidophagous ladybird beetles Harmonia axyridis and Coccinella undecimpunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae): the role of body weight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The magnitude, direction and symmetry of intraguild predation (IGP) between the developmental stages of the aphidophagous Harmonia axyridis Pallas and Coccinella undecimpunctata L. were characterized and compared. Mobility and body weight were the main factors affecting the magnitude of IGP.H. axyridis was more often the predator than C. undecimpunctata and eggs the most vulnerable developmental stage. There was significant asymmetrical IGP on eggs by the second and later, and fourth larval stages of H. axyridis and C. undecimpunctata, respectively. Asymmetrical IGP of pupae was only recorded for the fourth larval stage of H. axyridis. There was no IGP between adults, but larvae of both species attacked heterospecifics. The best model of the relationship between rate of predation and the difference in the body weight of IG predator and prey differs for the two ladybirds. A small difference in the body weights leads to a marked increase in the rate of predation in H. axyridis but not in C. undecimpunctata. In asymmetrical combinations, increase in body weight of the intraguild predator did not significantly increase the rate of predation. Mobility and body weight were not the only important parameters involved in the symmetry of IGP. Aggressive behaviour of H. axyridis negatively affected the survival of C. undecimpunctata.
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".