MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147188333 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3385

Flexible diet choice offsets protein costs of pathogen resistance in a caterpillar

2005· article· en· W2147188333 on OpenAlexaff
K. P. Lee, Jenny S. Cory, Kenneth Wilson, David Raubenheimer, Stephen J. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityLaurentian University
FundersNatural Environment Research Council
KeywordsBiologyPathogenSpodoptera littoralisNutrientImmune systemVirulenceDietary proteinCaterpillarResistance (ecology)LarvaEcologyMicrobiologyImmunologyAnimal scienceNoctuidaeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mounting effective resistance against pathogens is costly in terms of energy and nutrients. However, it remains unexplored whether hosts can offset such costs by adjusting their dietary intake so as to recoup the specific resources involved. We test this possibility by experimentally challenging caterpillars (Spodoptera littoralis) with a highly virulent entomopathogen (nucleopolyhedrovirus), under dietary regimes varying in the content of protein and digestible carbohydrate. We found that dietary protein influenced both resistance to pathogen attack and constitutive immune function to a greater extent than did dietary carbohydrate, indicating higher protein costs of resistance than energy costs. Moreover, when allowed to self-compose their diet, insects surviving viral challenge increased their relative intake of protein compared with controls and those larvae dying of infection, thus demonstrating compensation for protein costs associated with resistance. These results suggest that the change in the host's nutritional demands to fight infection induces a compensatory shift in feeding behaviour.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations417
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicInsect-Plant Interactions and ControlFrench-language works237,207