Sexually dimorphic effect of mating on the melanotic encapsulation response in the harem‐defending Wellington tree weta, <i>Hemideina crassidens</i> (Orthoptera: Tettigonioidea: Anostostomatidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reproductive activities are generally costly to immune responsiveness because limited resources required by reproduction are diverted away from immunity (and vice versa). Reproduction, however, is not expected to affect the immune response in males and females similarly as mating is expected to negatively affect male immunity more so than female immunity. Here, I test the phenotypic plasticity hypothesis in the Wellington tree weta (Hemideina crassidens), a sexually dimorphic orthopteran insect that is endemic to New Zealand. My laboratory experiment showed that although males had higher rates of melanotic encapsulation than females, contrary to prediction, females were the only sex significantly affected by mating and the effect was positive. In addition to immunity differing between the sexes, immune function can differ intrasexually, particularly when males are polymorphic and different investment strategies are used to maximize fitness. Male H. crassidens exhibit alternative mating strategies that are represented by three different morphotypes. I therefore explored whether the morphs differed in their melanotic encapsulation response and whether mating affected the morphs differently. I found no difference among morphs or an effect of mating on male immune response.
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) | 0.002 | 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 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".