Semiochemical-based Reproductive Isolation Among Sympatric Species of <i>Trypodendron</i> (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trypodendron retusum (LeConte) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) females excised from newly attacked trembling aspen, Populus tremuloides Michaux (Salicaceae), were shown for the first time to produce the aggregation pheromone (+)-lineatin. Coupled gas chromatographic-electroantennographic detection analysis (GC-EAD) disclosed that the antennae of T. retusum, as well as the antennae of three sympatric species, native T. lineatum (Olivier) and T. rufitarsus (Kirby) and exotic T. domesticum (L.), respond to synthetic (+)-lineatin, but not the (-) enantiomer. In contrast, the antennae of T. betulae Swaine responded to SR- and RR-linalool oxide pyranoid and did not detect lineatin. GC-EAD analysis of volatiles from host and nonhost tree species revealed that conifer-produced α-pinene and angiosperm-produced conophthorin and salicylaldehyde were perceived by the antennae of all three native lineatin-perceiving species, suggesting behavioral activity. Field trapping experiments showed that salicylaldehyde synergized the response of coastal, but not interior, T. retusum to lineatin and inhibited the response of T. lineatum and T. rufitarsus. In the absence of salicylaldehyde, α-pinene appeared to inhibit the response of interior T. retusum to lineatin, while for T. lineatum and T. rufitarsus it had an apparent positive additive or synergistic effect. No behavioral response occurred to conophthorin. The results provide evidence for semiochemical-based reproductive isolation between T. retusum and T. betulae, and between these two angiosperm-infesting species and the two conifer-infesting species. They do not explain how isolation could be maintained between T. lineatum and T. rufitarsus.
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) | 0.001 | 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".