The Life History of Folsomia Candida (Willem) (Collembola: Isotomidae) Relative to Temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The parthenogenetic mode of reproduction in Collembola, although frequently questioned in the past (Schaller, 1953; Mayer, 1957; Falkenhan, 1932), has only recently been recorded and confirmed for several species; Onychiutus parthenogeneticus Choudhuri (Choudhuri, 1958), Folsomia candida (Willem) (Goto, 1960; Marshall and Kevan, 1962; Green, 1964; Husson and Paldvody, 1967), Folsomia cavicola Cassagnau and Delamare (Goto, 1960), Tullbergia krausbaueri (Bomer) (Hale, 1966; Petersen, 1971), and Isotoma notabilis Schaffer (Petersen, 1971). Sex-ratios in populations of the above cited species are often unknown. Existing data indicate that the composition of a population may vary with the geographical distribution of the species. Populations of Folsomia candida (Willem), known to be bisexual in England (Goto, 1960), have been found so far to consist entirely of females in Canada (Sharma and Kevan, 1963a) and in Michigan (Snider, 1973). Similar to I. notabilis and T. krausbaueri (Petersen, 1971), investigations throughout the year and over larger geographic areas are necessary before northern USA and Canada F. candida may be labeled as obligatory parthenogenetic. Snider (1973) recorded in detail the life cycle of F. candida at 21°C. The present study provides information on the influence of temperature on the bionomics of the species.
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 | 0.000 | 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".