Impact of plant nutrients on the relationship between a herbivorous insect and its symbiotic bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interactions between herbivorous insects and their symbiotic micro-organisms can be influenced by the plant species on which the insects are reared, but the underlying mechanisms are not understood. Here, we identify plant nutrients, specifically amino acids, as a candidate factor affecting the impact of symbiotic bacteria on the performance of the phloem-feeding aphid Aphis fabae. Aphis fabae grew more slowly on the labiate plant Lamium purpureum than on an alternative host plant Vicia faba, and the negative effect of L. purpureum on aphid growth was consistently exacerbated by the bacterial secondary symbionts Regiella insecticola and Hamiltonella defensa, which attained high densities in L. purpureum-reared aphids. The amino acid content of the phloem sap of L. purpureum was very low; and A. fabae on chemically defined diets of low amino acid content also grew slowly and had elevated secondary symbiont densities. It is suggested that the phloem nutrient profile of L. purpureum promotes deleterious traits in the secondary symbionts and disturbs insect controls over bacterial abundance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".