MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330660006 · doi:10.1017/s0007485311000617

Carry-over effect of host nutritional quality on performance of spruce budworm progeny

2011· article· en· W2330660006 on OpenAlexafffund
Álvaro Fuentealba, Éric Bauce

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Entomological Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpruce budwormBiologyChoristoneura fumiferanaAbies balsameaBalsamBlack sprucePupaHost (biology)InstarBotanyFecundityOffspringNutrientAnimal scienceHorticultureTortricidaeLarvaTaigaEcologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of host nutritional quality on spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana (Clemens)) parental and offspring performance was studied using field and laboratory rearing experiments, and foliar chemical analyses. Foliage of balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.), white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) and black spruce (P. mariana (Mill.) BSP) was used to rear the parental generation in the field, whereas an artificial diet was used to rear the progeny under laboratory conditions. Important differences in the food quality were provided by the three hosts. Black spruce foliage had higher concentrations of certain monoterpene deterrents and total phenolics, together with stronger seasonal declines in nutrients such as N, P and Mg, compared with the other hosts. We hypothesise that this trend may be related to poor performance and survival of the progeny. Laboratory rearing showed that progeny of parents that fed on black spruce exhibited longer developmental times and greater mortality, and had lower pupal mass than progeny of parents fed on the other hosts. Further, artificial food-fed progeny of insects reared on black spruce reached sixth-instar later, with lower mass, and exhibited higher relative growth rate (RGR) than progeny of parents fed on the other hosts. These results suggest nutritionally-based parental effects. These results also confirmed that the quality of food consumed by the parents can influence the fitness of the next generation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Entomological ResearchSame topicForest Insect Ecology and ManagementFrench-language works237,207