Thermal stress affects patch time allocation by preventing forgetting in a parasitoid wasp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning and memory allow animals to adjust their foraging strategies through experience. Despite the known impact of temperature on many aspects of the behavioral ecology of animals, memory retention in the face of realistic thermal stress has seldom been assessed. In the laboratory, we studied the behavioral expression of an egg parasitoid’s (Trissolcus basalis) memory when exposed to thermal stress that could be encountered in nature. We hypothesized that thermal stress would disrupt memory consolidation and/or modify the optimality of memory retention, thus affecting patch time allocation strategies. Memory consolidation was resilient to 1h of thermal stress following an unrewarded experience (learning) on a patch of host-associated infochemicals. Neither high (40 °C) or low (10 °C) thermal stress changed the intensity of the experienced wasps’ behavioral response relative to those held at a moderate temperature (25 °C). Next, we investigated how temperature stress could affect the parasitoids’ memory retention (“forgetting”). When kept at a constant moderate temperature after learning, residence times of wasps retested on host cues increased relative to controls (naïve wasps) over a period of 4 days as they presumably “forgot.” However, both hot and cool daily temperature cycles prevented forgetting; the residence times of retested experienced wasps in these treatments did not change relative to controls over time. We discuss to what extent this may be an adaptive response by the parasitoids versus a physiological constraint imposed by temperature. Our findings contribute to an understanding of the impact of thermal stress on foraging strategies that involve learning and memory.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".