Geographic variation in the field response of male European pine sawflies, <i>Neodiprion sertifer</i>, to different pheromone stereoisomers and esters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The European pine sawfly, Neodiprion sertifer (Geoffroy) (Hymenoptera: Diprionidae), is a widespread and economically important forest insect. The sex pheromone communication system of this species has been previously investigated in North America, Japan and Europe, with the acetate or propionate of the alcohol (2 S ,3 S ,7 S )‐3,7‐dimethyl‐2‐pentadecanol (diprionol) shown to be the main pheromone component. In some locations, male attraction either increased or decreased by the addition of the (2 S ,3 R ,7 R )‐diprionyl acetate isomer. However, these studies were made with different batches of synthetic pheromones, with different types of traps and according to different procedures, so the observed differences might not reflect true geographic variation. Here we investigate the geographic pattern of male sawfly response by using identical chemicals, traps and experimental procedures at eight field sites ranging from Japan in the east to Canada in the west. We found an increased inhibitory effect of the (2 S ,3 R ,7 R )‐isomer from Japan and Siberia to Europe. At the eastern sites, increasing amounts of the (2 S ,3 R ,7 R )‐isomer up to and equal to the amount of the (2 S ,3 S ,7 S )‐isomer, did not influence the trap catch, whereas at sites in Europe, as little as 1% of the (2 S ,3 R ,7 R )‐isomer almost completely inhibited the attraction. The response of the North American population was intermediate. The only site in which the (2 S ,3 R ,7 R )‐isomer was essential for the attraction of males was in Siberia. A similar pattern was found for the (2 S ,3 R ,7 S )‐isomer. Both the acetate and the propionate form of the (2 S ,3 S ,7 S )‐isomer were attractive by themselves in Japan, Europe and North America, and neither the (2 S ,3 R ,7 S )‐isomer nor the (2 S ,3 R ,7 R )‐isomer alone were attractive, in the acetate or propionate form. We discuss the significance of our findings for the development of more efficient monitoring schemes and for the causes of population divergence and speciation in the European pine sawfly.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".