Conspecific Eggs and Bertha Armyworm,<i>Mamestra configurata</i>(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), Oviposition Site Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oviposition biology of the bertha armyworm, Mamestra configurata Walker, was studied with emphasis on the effect of conspecific eggs on oviposition site selection. Bertha armyworm lay clusters of up to 700 eggs, and larvae have feeding and growth habits similar to those of other Lepidoptera that gain advantages from feeding aggregations. In a field-cage experiment, multiple egg masses per leaf were noted, although the vast majority (85%+) of leaves available for oviposition received no eggs. A series of dual-choice laboratory experiments was conducted using paired excised leaves with and without eggs or egg-wash extracts. Females strongly preferred to oviposit on leaves with eggs of a different female than on leaves without eggs. However, females did not prefer leaves with their own eggs over control leaves without eggs. Gravid females also preferred leaves treated with a methanol egg-wash over leaves treated only with methanol, indicating that the source of oviposition stimulation may be chemically based. The potential relevance of these observations is discussed in the context of host-plant distribution and their exploitation by bertha armyworm.
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".