Physiological Mechanisms of Variable Nutrient Accumulation Patterns Between Diapausing and Non-Diapausing Fall Webworm (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae) Pupae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diapause is a highly advantageous strategy for winter survival for insects living in temperate environments. However, insects typically do not feed during diapause and are therefore presented with a complicated energetics problem. The fall webworm, Hyphantria cunea, overwinter as diapausing pupae, but adults of this species lose their ability to feed due to the degeneration of their mouthparts. Thus, the energy reserves stored before diapauses contribute to the survival rate and fitness of the adults after emergence. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that diapause-destined larvae of H. cunea reserve more energy by increasing feeding rate, feeding efficiency, or both, during the diapause preparation phase compared with non-diapause-destined larvae. We observed higher digestive efficiency, increased lipase and amylase activity, and lower protease activity in diapause-destined larvae compared to non-diapause-destined larvae. These differences in digestive physiology during diapause preparation lead to greater body size and mass, increased lipid and carbohydrate content, and lower soluble protein content in diapausing pupae, relative to non-diapause pupae - results consistent with our hypothesis. We conclude that diapause-destined fall webworm reserve more energy than non-diapause-destined individuals by increasing feeding efficiency, and that this increase in efficiency is at least partially driven by increased lipase and amylase activities in the midgut. This is in contrast to non-diapause-destined larvae, which likely reserve greater protein than diapause-destined larvae to help maintain their physiological function.
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".