The Effect of Parasitism and Interpopulation Hybridization on Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) Fitness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research in mosquito population genetics suggests that interpopulation hybridization has likely contributed to the rapid spread of the container-breeding mosquitoes. Here, I used laboratory experiments to investigate whether interpopulation Aedes (Stegomyia) albopictus (Skuse) F1 and F2 hybrids exhibit higher fitness than parental populations, and whether hybrid mosquito performance is related to infection by the coevolved protozoan parasite Ascogregarina taiwanensis (Lien and Levine). Overall, there were significant differences in development time, wing length, and survival between the two parental mosquito populations, but no difference in per capita growth rate r. Hybrid mosquitoes were generally intermediate in phenotype to the parentals, except that F2 females were significantly larger than the midparent average. In addition, As. taiwanensis parasites produced fewest oocysts when they were reared in hosts of hybrid origin. These data suggest that hybridization between previously isolated mosquito populations can result in slight increases in potential mosquito reproductive success, via increased hybrid body size, and via the temporary escape from coevolved parasites. These findings are significant because studies have shown that even slight hybrid vigor can have positive fitness consequences for population persistence. Although this was a laboratory experiment extending only to the F2 generation, many other invasive insects also carry coevolved parasites, and thus the patterns seen in this mosquito system may be broadly relevant.
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".