MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2951502259 · doi:10.82308/25329

The effects of phenotypic plasticity on reproductive success of Trichogramma euproctidis

2011· article· en· W2951502259 on OpenAlexfundno aff
L. Durocher-Granger

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsBiologyContext (archaeology)Phenotypic plasticitySpermSperm competitionCompetition (biology)ReproductionParasitoidAvian clutch sizeZoologyReproductive successTrichogrammaEcologyLarvaPopulationBotanyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The body size of parasitoids varies with the amount of resources contained in a single host and this phenotypic plasticity applies to their reproductive traits. The impact of this phenotypic plasticity on the reproductive success of the egg parasitoid Trichogramma euproctidis in context of competition has been investigated. This species has been chosen for this study because different aspects of the reproductive strategies of both males and females are well known.Phenotypic plasticity in reproductive traits was observed in T. euproctidis. Results show that sperm size, and oocyte volume and number increased with body size. An index of maternal investment was calculated to determine how the effort invested in reproduction by females varies with body size and suggests that larger females invested more resources in reproduction. The plasticity in reproductive traits in T. euproctidis was a consequence of an environmental constraint of food availability, suggesting that resources acquisition during larval stage is a determinant factor of fitness. In context of sperm competition, smaller sperm were able to fertilize eggs earlier in an oviposition sequence but that advantage was apparent only when small sperm were in numerical inferiority which indicates that smaller sperm can compensate by being more competitive. Oocyte volume did not influence the outcome of the larval competition, but the clutch of the second-ovipositing female was advantaged, suggesting an ovicidal behavior from the second female.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control→French-language works237,207→