Extending understanding of latitudinal patterns in parasitoid wasp diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While the diversity of most taxa increases from temperate to tropical regions, the parasitoid wasp family Ichneumonidae has often been cited as an example of an anomalous diversity pattern with their highest diversity at mid‐latitudes. A rich body of literature has attempted to explain this pattern and provide hypothesised mechanisms, and recent studies have suggested that the pattern may result from biases in the data. Previous studies of patterns in ichneumonid diversity have mined catalogue data or have compared collections from tropical and temperate areas across a limited range of latitudes. Few studies are available that include species richness for all subfamilies, and none have been from regions above 60°N. To increase the number of datasets available to address these patterns, we first tested the assumption that subfamily abundance can be a strong predictor of species richness. We then compared abundances of ichneumonid subfamilies in field collections from a wide range of latitudes (25°S–81°N), and used generalised additive models to evaluate characteristics of the subfamilies as predictors of the observed patterns. We demonstrate a wide variety of latitudinal patterns, reflecting the ecological variation between subfamilies. In addition, our models show that host taxon and subfamily identities are better predictors of the shape of the relationship between subfamily abundance and latitude than other characteristics that have been previously hypothesised to be important, including parasitoid life history strategy and body size.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".