Effect of irradiation on the mating capacity and competitiveness of<i>Drosophila suzukii</i>(Diptera: Drosophilidae) for the development of the sterile insect technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The sterile insect technique is a new approach for the integrated management ofDrosophila suzukiiMatsumura (Diptera: Drosophilidae), an invasive pest in North America. We evaluated, under laboratory conditions, the mating capacities and success of maleD. suzukii, irradiated at a dose of 120 Gy, with and without competition. We also explored the tendency of females to remate depending if their first mate was irradiated or not. We observed that irradiated males have the same mating capacity as control males, copulating with, respectively, 6.4 ± 1.9 females versus 6.9 ± 2.0 females in a 24-hour period. Irradiated males won the competition 37.5% of times, which is not significantly different from competiveness of control males. Female remating can be considered infrequent and not significantly influenced by male treatment: 7.4% of the females first mated with control males and 18.8% of the females first mated with irradiated males remated when given the opportunity two days and four days after the first mating. Latency before mating and mating duration were not significantly influenced by male treatment, but by presence of male competition. Overall, irradiated males thus seem to be as performant as control males, which is an important condition for a successful sterile insect technique programme.
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".