Combining photoperiod and thermal responses to predict phenological mismatch for introduced insects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A wide variety of organisms use the regular seasonal changes in photoperiod as a cue to align their life cycles with favorable conditions. Yet the phenological consequences of photoperiodism for organisms exposed to new climates are often overlooked. We present a conceptual approach and phenology model that maps voltinism (generations per year) and the degree of phenological mismatch that can arise when organisms with a short-day diapause response are introduced to new regions or are otherwise exposed to new climates. Our degree-day-based model combines continent-wide spatialized daily climate data, calculated date-specific and latitude-specific day lengths, and experimentally determined developmental responses to both photoperiod and temperature. Using the case of the knotweed psyllid Aphalara itadori, a new biological control agent being introduced from Japan to North America and Europe to control an invasive weed, we show how incorporating a short-day diapause response will result in geographic patterns of attempted voltinism that are strikingly different from the potential number of generations based on degree-days alone. The difference between the attempted and potential generations represents a quantitative measure of phenological mismatch between diapause timing and the end of the growing season. We conclude that insects moved from lower to higher latitudes (or to cooler climates) will tend to diapause too late, potentially resulting in high mortality from inclement weather, and those moved from higher to lower latitude (to warmer climates) may be prone to diapausing too early, therefore not fully exploiting the growing season and/or suffering from insufficient reserves for the longer duration in diapause. Mapped output reveals a central region with good phenology match that shifts north or south depending on the geographic source of the insect and its corresponding critical photoperiod for diapause. These results have direct relevance for efforts to establish populations of classical biocontrol agents. More generally, our approach and model could be applied to a wide variety of photoperiod- and temperature-sensitive organisms that are exposed to changes in climate, including resident and invasive agricultural pests and species of conservation concern.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.040 | 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".