Costs and Benefits of Wax Production in the Larvae of the Ladybeetle Scymnus nubilus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mulsant (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) are common predators in apple orchards, covered by a wax layer that might act as a defense mechanism against natural enemies. However, the costs and benefits of protection conferred by wax remain to be assessed. We tested the following hypothesis: there is a trade-off in wax producing ladybeetles between the protection conferred by wax cover and the physiological or behavioral costs associated with its production. We predict that: (1) wax production is an efficient defensive mechanism (against intraguild predation), (2) wax production is associated with detrimental physiological (growth, reproduction) or behavioral effects (behavioral compensation: increased biomass consumption). RESULTS: (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) being used as a potential intraguild predator of the coccinellid. Waxless individuals were more susceptible to intraguild predation by lacewing larvae. Adults originating from waxless larvae were lighter than the ones originating from wax larvae, suggesting a metabolic cost resulting from a constant need of wax production. Body-weight gain and conversion efficiency were lower in waxless larvae. Biomass consumption was similar, showing that waxless larvae did not compensate for the physiological cost by eating more aphid biomass. CONCLUSION: The results indicate the potential existence of a trade-off between growth and protection associated with wax production.
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) | 0.000 | 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".