MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

F<scp>UNCTIONAL</scp>E<scp>COLOGY OF</scp>I<scp>MMATURE</scp>P<scp>ARASITOIDS</scp>

2004· review· en· W2126573836 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacques Brodeur, Guy Boivin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Entomology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, there has been exciting progress in our understanding of the behavioral and evolutionary ecology of immature parasitoids. Developing parasitoids face a diversity of ecological constraints, and parasitism success involves decisions and responses made by immature parasitoids to find a host and solve conflicts with five potential antagonists: host, mother, siblings, competitors, and natural enemies. In this review we synthesize and interpret results from studies on (a) the convergent evolution of host selection behavior of first-instar larvae and females in hymenopteran, dipteran, and coleopteran families; (b) the competitive interactions between larval parasitoids and the evolution of gregariousness; (c) the susceptibility of parasitized hosts to predation; and (d) the ability of parasitoids to manipulate the behavior of the host. We discuss how ecological interactions between juvenile parasitoids and their hosts, competitors, and natural enemies influence the evolution of parasitoid life-history strategies, and why the integration of functional aspects of the ecology of immature parasitoids provides a reliable framework for effective host-parasitoid population models and formulation of biological control solutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.027

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations212
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of EntomologySame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207