Behavioral manipulation of the spider <i>Macrophyes pacoti</i> (Araneae: Anyphaenidae) by the araneopathogenic fungus <i>Gibellula</i> sp. (Hypocreales: Cordycipitaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Host manipulation has already been documented in several distinct host–parasite associations, covering all major phyla of living organisms. While in animals we know that several species have the ability to manipulate their hosts for the benefit of the parasite, in arthropopathogenic fungi there is very little knowledge about possible behavioral manipulation. We report for the first time the interaction between the araneopathogenic fungus genus Gibellula Cavara and the spider Macrophyes pacoti Brescovit, Oliveira, Sobczak and Sobczak, 2019 (Anyphaenidae) in addition to investigating the potential change in behavior of spiders infected by the parasitic fungus. We also investigated whether the rainfall regime influences the abundance of infected spiders and the parasitism rate by the araneopathogenic fungus. Our results corroborated our hypothesis that the fungus induces vertical segregation in the spider population, inducing infected spiders to be at higher heights than uninfected ones. Dead infected spiders were found in a stretched position that probably helps in fixing the carcass on the leaves by increasing the contact surface between the host and the substrate. Our results also confirm the positive relationship between the rainy season and the greater number of parasitized spiders and the parasitism rate.
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".