Dietary self‐selection behaviour by the adults of the aphidophagous ladybeetle <i>Harmonia axyridis</i> (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Harmonia axyridis is a generalist predator with a high range of accepted prey. Prey differ in nutritive contents, energetic values and cost associated with their capture and ingestion. As a result of selection pressures, animals will tend to hunt for their prey efficiently. In this paper we evaluated the suitability of Myzus persicae and Aphis fabae to the adults of the aulica phenotype of H. axyridis, their feeding preferences and the impact of mixed diets on their fitness. Feeding preference of predators was evaluated through their response to different relative abundance of prey. Under a single diet regime, the adults of the aulica phenotype fed on more individuals M. persicae than A. fabae but consumed less biomass from the former. None of those prey affect relative growth rate and reproductive capacity of the ladybeetles. Males and females present different types of response to three levels of different relative abundance of prey. While males show a constant feeding preference for M. persicae, females did not show a feeding preference (i.e. null switching response). Under a mixed diet regime, adults’ voracity gradually increased as the proportion of M. persicae increased, but biomass consumed and relative growth rate was not affected. On the other hand, fecundity and fertility increased. Our results suggest that H. axyridis present self‐selection behaviour because they agree with the basic criteria of Waldbauer and Friedman's self‐selection, i.e. (i) the animal's choice of food or nutrients is non‐random, and (ii) the coccinellid benefits from self‐selecting.
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".