Evidence for a southward autumn migration of nocturnal noctuid moths in central Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Insect migrations are spectacular natural events and resemble a remarkable relocation of biomass between two locations in space. Unlike the well-known migrations of daytime flying butterflies, such as the painted lady (Vanessa cardui) or the monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus), much less widely known are the migrations of nocturnal moths. These migrations – typically involving billions of moths from different taxa – have recently attracted considerable scientific attention. Nocturnal moth migrations have traditionally been investigated by light trapping and by observations in the wild, but in recent times a considerable improvement in our understanding of this phenomenon has come from studying insect orientation behaviour, using vertical-looking radar. In order to establish a new model organism to study compass mechanisms in migratory moths, we tethered each of two species of central European Noctuid moths in a flight simulator to study their flight bearings: the red underwing (Catocala nupta) and the large yellow underwing (Noctua pronuba). Both species had significantly oriented flight bearings under an unobscured view of the clear night sky and in the Earth's natural magnetic field. Red underwings oriented south-southeast, while large yellow underwings oriented southwest, both suggesting a southerly autumn migration towards the Mediterranean. Interestingly, large yellow underwings became disoriented on humid (foggy) nights while red underwings remained oriented. We found no evidence in either species for a time-independent sky compass mechanism as previously suggested for the large yellow underwing.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".