Effects of sublethal attack by a sucking insect, Hyalymenus tarsatus, on Sesbania drummondii seeds: Impact on some seed traits related to fitness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developing seeds of Sesbania drummondii are attacked by nymphs and adults of the bug Hyalymenus tarsatus (Heteroptera: Alydidae), which kill some seeds and weaken others. Parasitism by this piercing-sucking insect reduced the resources for the future seedling and affected seed physiology, including dormancy and exudation of allelochemicals of imbibing seeds. Seeds attacked by H. tarsatus had reduced mass (20-80% reduction, depending on intensity of attack). Heavy attack led to irregular shape, changes in seed coat color, and disruption of dormancy. While intact seeds did not imbibe during a 48-hour test in water, a high proportion of bug-attacked seeds germinated, from 51 to 94%, depending on intensity of attack. Attack by H. tarsatus also affected accumulation of allelochemicals and their exudation by imbibing seeds. There were no quantitative differences in proanthocyanidin content between exudates of attacked and unattacked seeds. In contrast, concentrations of total condensed tannins were higher in exudates of attacked seeds on the third day of imbibition. This change may reflect induction of chemical defenses by herbivore attack and/or a mechanism to restore seed coat impermeability. Although difficult to quantify, effects of sublethal attack by this sucking insect on the seed bank are likely to have important consequences for the demography of S. drummondii, a short-lived perennial in habitats where conditions for recruitment are variable and unpredictable among years.
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".