Parasitoid pressure does not elicit defensive polyphenism in the green peach aphid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Aphids are capable of adapting to parasitoid pressure in the absence of sexual reproduction using epigenetically controlled polyphenism. Asexual lineages of aphids could thus become resistant to parasitoids over time and with repeated exposure, hampering biocontrol efforts that rely on parasitoid wasps. 2. Prior to this study, wing polyphenism and reproductive polyphenism had been reported as parasitoid‐adaptive responses in asexual lineages of at least two species of aphids, but it remained unclear whether parasitoid exposure could induce other defensive polyphenisms. Using a rigorous, replicated experimental evolution design, we aimed to induce adaptive polyphenisms in the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae Sulzer, through serial exposures of single asexual lines to the parasitoid Aphidius colemani Viereck over four consecutive generations. 3. We measured changes in parasitoid susceptibility, reproductive schedule, body size, and production of pink or alate offspring compared to aphid control lines not exposed to parasitoids. Despite this consistently strong selective parasitoid pressure, there was no evidence that asexual lineages of M. persicae adapt to parasitoid pressure using adaptive polyphenism. 4. Our data indicate that pseudo‐crowding stress – where aphids disturbed by parasitoids or predators wander within a colony, increasing aphid‐to‐aphid contact and creating the illusion of a more crowded environment – may be necessary for M. persicae to produce defensive polyphenisms in response to parasitoid attack.
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) | 0.003 | 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".