MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224291069 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1554972/v1

Selecting aggressiveness to improve biological control agents efficiency

2022· preprint· en· W4224291069 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre Royer, François Dumont, Caroline Provost, Éric Lucas

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect behavior and control techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsHeritabilityPredationPopulationSelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyEcologyDemographyEvolutionary biologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In agroecosystems, omnivorous predators are recognized as potential biological control agents because of the numerous species pest species they prey on. Nonetheless, it could be possible to enhance their efficiency through artificial selection on traits of economical or ecological relevance. Aggressiveness is expected to be related to zoophagy, diet preferences and to a higher attack rate. The study aimed to assess the aggressiveness degree of the damsel bug, Nabis americoferus, and estimate its heritability. We hypothesized that a high aggressiveness degree can be selected, and that males are more aggressive than females. Using artificial selection, we reared two separate populations, each composed of nine genetically isolated lines characterized by their different aggressiveness degree (aggressive, docile and non-selected). After five generations, we had efficiently selected aggressive behavior. The realized heritability was 0.16 (± 0.04 S.E.) and 0.27 (± 0.1 S.E.) for aggressiveness and docility in the first population. It was 0.25 (± 0.03) and 0.23 (± 0.08 S.E.) for the second population. Males were more aggressive than females only for the second population. The potential of these individuals as biological control agents and the ecological consequences of aggressiveness is discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicInsect behavior and control techniquesFrench-language works237,207