<i>Hylobius abietis</i> L. feeding on the novel host <i>Pinus brutia</i> Ten. increases emission of volatile organic compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Plants respond to feeding by herbivorous insects by producing volatile organic chemicals, which mediate interactions between herbivores and plants. Yet, few studies investigated whether such plant responses to herbivory differ between historical host and novel plants. Here, we investigated whether herbivory by the pine weevil Hylobius abietis causes a release of volatile organic chemicals from a novel tree Pinus brutia and compared the relative amounts of volatiles released from herbivore's historical hosts and P. brutia . We collected volatiles emitted from P. brutia seedlings that were either subjected to feeding by H. abietis or no feeding. Our results indicated that feeding increased emission of volatile compounds, composed of monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes, and that the emission was several fold higher in the damaged seedlings than in undamaged seedlings. In particular, emission of monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes increased by 4.4‐and 10‐fold in the damaged plants, respectively. Strikingly, individual monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes showed much greater dissimilarity between damaged and undamaged seedlings. Furthermore, several minor monoterpenes showed negative relationships with the weevil gnawed area. We discussed these results with the results of previous studies focused on historical host plants of H. abietis and hypothesized the ecological relevance and importance of our results pertaining relevance to the plant–herbivory interactions.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".