Flower-visiting and mating behaviour of <i>Eulonchus sapphirinus</i> (Diptera: Acroceridae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Acrocerid flies are often considered to be rare and their role in pollination is poorly understood. In this study, adult Eulonchus sapphirinus Osten Sacken were common on flowers of Geranium robertianum L. (Geraniaceae) in Olympic National Park, Washington, and have morphological and behavioural characteristics that indicate a dependence on floral nectar. Both males and females of this species are good potential pollinators from a behavioural standpoint. They make few revisits to individual flowers, remain highly constant to one flowering species in each nectar-foraging bout, and carry pollen on their bodies. Individuals were abundant and formed the majority of insect visitors to G. robertianum flowers. Males and females differed in their flower-visiting behaviour, with females visiting more individual flowers and doing so more slowly than males. This difference between the sexes appears to relate to mating behaviour, which takes place within the flower patches. The ramifications of the observed flower-visiting and mating behaviour for flower pollination are discussed. This study shows that based on both their abundance and their behaviour, these flies are potentially important pollinators in certain habitats.
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".