MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152214423 · doi:10.14411/eje.2008.050

Leucopis annulipes larvae (Diptera: Chamaemyiidae) use a furtive predation strategy within aphid colonies

2008· article· en· W2152214423 on OpenAlex
Bruno Fréchette, François Larouche, Éric Lucas

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Entomology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyCoccinellidaeAcyrthosiphon pisumCecidomyiidaeAphidAphididaePredationLarvaHemipteraHarmonia axyridisBotanyZoologyEcologyPredatorPEST analysisHomoptera

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A laboratory experiment was conducted to determine whether the predation strategy of larvae of the aphidophagous silver fly Leucopis annulipes Zetterstedt (Diptera: Chamaemyiidae) is furtive, as are larvae of the aphidophagous midge Aphidoletes aphidimyza Rondani (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae), or active like aphidophagous ladybird beetle larvae (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). The impact of L. annulipes larvae on pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum (Harris) (Hemiptera: Aphididae), colony disturbance was evaluated and compared with that of the furtive predator A. aphidimyza and the active-searching ladybird beetle Harmonia axyridis Pallas. Results indicate that aphids showed significantly fewer defensive acts (dropping, walking away, wriggling) in the presence of L. annulipes larvae than of ladybird beetle larvae. Furthermore, the impact of L. annulipes larvae on aphid colony disturbance was similar to that of A. aphidimyza and to a control treatment without predators. These results clearly indicate that L. annulipes larvae use a furtive predation strategy.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.189 · 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