MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168403170 · doi:10.1139/z06-025

Effects of synchronization with host plant phenology occur early in the larval development of a spring folivore

2006· article· en· W2168403170 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brad C. Jones, Emma Despland

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPhenologyInstarLepidoptera genitaliaPupaHatchingLarvaLymantria disparEcologyForagingBotanyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early spring feeding Lepidoptera depend on synchronization of larval emergence with host plant phenology for optimal growth and development. Physical and chemical characteristics of foliage change over the course of the growing season, and a delay in larval emergence therefore results in larvae foraging on lower quality food. We examine the effect of synchronization of larval emergence with leaf phenology on the entire larval stage of the forest tent caterpillar, Malacosoma disstria Hübner, 1820 (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae). Caterpillars were reared from egg hatch to pupation on trembling aspen, Populus tremuloides Michx; 10 days separated egg hatch in the early and late treatments. Late-hatching caterpillars experienced reduced growth in the early instars, but growth in the later instars did not differ between treatments. Reduced growth early in development resulted in both prolongation of the larval stage through the occurrence of additional instars, and lower pupal mass. Aspen foliage quality changes rapidly during leaf expansion, and the late-hatching caterpillars likely missed the narrow window of opportunity for young larvae to feed on high-quality developing foliage. This study demonstrates the importance of early-instar ecology in Lepidoptera.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.147 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207