Oviposition Preference and Offspring Performance of a Wheat Midge<i>Sitodiplosis mosellana</i>(Géhin) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) on Defended and Less Defended Wheat Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oviposition preferences of a herbivore, the wheat midge Sitodiplosis mosellana (Géhin) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae), on wheat were investigated in relation to two hypotheses: female preferences are adapted to offspring performance; plants may evolve independent defenses that both deter oviposition and reduce offspring performance. Variation in egg density and larval performance were measured for three plant genotypes: a preferred, susceptible wheat; a less preferred, susceptible wheat; a less preferred wheat defended against larval feeding. Oviposition peaked 10–11 d after emergence of the inflorescences and then declined sharply on all three wheat genotypes, although the inflorescences of the genotypes developed at different rates. On the preferred, susceptible wheat, larval performance was high for oviposition that occurred until pollination and low later. On a less preferred wheat, larval performance was high when eggs were laid before or after pollination. On a defended wheat, larval performance was always low. Oviposition preference was associated with larval performance that varied with plant developmental stage, but imperfectly, possibly because females do not detect cues for seed development. Females deposited eggs further from larval feeding sites when ovipositing on less preferred wheats, regardless of whether larval performance on the wheat was high or low. A low preference in combination with a shift in oviposition site supports the hypothesis that some wheats have evolved a defense that deters oviposition. This defense against oviposition is independent of a defense that reduces larval performance, which causes an apparent failure in the expected preference-performance relationship.
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".