Parasitism, immune response, and egg production of the spearhead bluet (<i>Coenagrion</i> <i>hastulatum</i>) damselfly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theoretical models predict that parasites reduce reproductive success of their hosts, but very few empirical studies have given support to this. Using the spearhead bluet (Coenagrion hastulatum (Charpentier, 1825)) damselfly, we tested how immune response, wing length, and the number of both endo- and ecto-parasites affect egg production of host damselflies. The study was conducted with four different populations in southwest Finland. We found a negative association between endoparasitic gregarines and number of host eggs. Furthermore, immune response increased with the number of water mites, but decreased with the number of eggs. Contrary to previous studies with other damselfly species, the number of ectoparasitic water mites did not affect the number of eggs. Moreover, wing length, used as an indicator of individual size, was not associated with egg numbers. The negative effect of gregarine parasites on egg numbers is likely to affect the composition of host populations, i.e., damselflies that show higher resistance to these endoparasites will have more of their offspring represented in subsequent generations. In future, more experimental research on the varying effects of different parasite species on the number of eggs is needed.
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".