Parasitoid complex and bionomics of<i>Apanteles polychrosidis</i>(Hymenoptera: Braconidae) on the ash leaf-cone roller (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ash leaf-cone roller,Caloptilia fraxinella(Ely) (Lepidoptera: Gracillariidae) is an introduced leaf-mining moth of horticultural ash trees (FraxinusLinnaeus; Oleaceae) in Western Canadian Prairie cities. Here, we identify the dominant parasitoid of this leaf-mining moth asApanteles polychrosidisVierek (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and document its emergence pattern, courtship, mating, and host acceptance behaviours.Apanteles polychrosidisadult emergence is protandrous and mating occurs soon after female emergence. MaleA. polychrosidiscan mate multiple times in short sequence with a mean copulation time of 49 seconds. It is likely thatA. polychrosidisoverwinters in an alternate larval host, after emergence fromC. fraxinella. Mated femaleA. polychrosidisreadily parasitise an alternate host, the obliquebanded leafroller (Choristoneura rosaceana(Harris); Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), known to overwinter as larvae. Through rearingC. fraxinellapupae, we describe the remainder of the parasitoid complex ofC. fraxinella, in order of parasitism rate, asDiadegmaFörster (nearDiadegmafenestrale(Holmgren)) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae), threeSympiesisFörster species (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) (Sympiesissericeicornis(Nees von Esenbeck), one nearSympiesisviridula(Thomson) and one unknown species), andPteromalus phycidis(Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) and show that severalSympiesisspecies can be hyperparasitic onA. polychrosidis.Caloptilia fraxinelladensity within the tree canopy is highest in the lower canopy. Host density and abiotic factors such as temperature and light intensity do not influence the within-canopy distribution of most parasitoids exceptSympiesisspecies, which preferred the northern canopy.
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".