Polyembryony in parasitic wasps: evolution of a novel mode of development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Major developmental innovations have been associated with adaptive radiations that have allowed particular groups of organisms to occupy empty ecospace. Well-known developmental novelties associated with the conquest of new habitats include the evolution of the tetrapode limb, allowing the radiation of vertebrates into a terrestrial habitat, and formation of insect wings that permitted their dispersal into the air. However, an understanding of the evolutionary forces and molecular mechanisms behind developmental novelties still remains tenuous. A little-studied adaptive radiation in insects from the developmental perspective is the evolution of parasitism. The parasitic lifestyle has allowed parasitic insects to occupy a novel ecological niche where they have evolved a plethora of life history strategies and modes of embryogenesis, developing on or within the body of the host. One of the most striking adaptations to development within the body of the host includes polyembryonic development, where certain wasps form clonally up to 2000 embryos from a single egg. Taking advantage of well-established insect phylogeny, techniques developed in a model insect, the fruit fly, and a wealth of knowledge in comparative insect embryology, we are starting to tease apart the evolutionary events that have led to this novel mode of development in insects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".