Differential immune responses in new and old fruit fly-parasitoid associations: Implications for their management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel), and marula fruit fly, Ceratitis cosyra (Walker), are major fruit-infesting tephritids across sub-Saharan Africa. Biological control of these pests using parasitic wasps has been widely adopted but with varying levels of success. Most studies investigating host-parasitoid models have focused on functional and evolutionary aspects leaving a knowledge gap about the physiological mechanisms underpinning the efficacy of parasitoids as biocontrol agents of tephritids. To better understand these physiological mechanisms, we investigated changes in the cellular immune responses of C. cosyra and B. dorsalis when exposed to the parasitic wasps, Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Ashmaed) and Psyttalia cosyrae (Wilkinson). We found that B. dorsalis was more resistant to parasitisation, had a higher hemocyte count, and encapsulated more parasitoid eggs compared to C. cosyra, achieving up to 100% encapsulation when exposed to P. cosyrae. Exposing B. dorsalis to either parasitoid species induced the formation of a rare cell type, the giant multinucleated hemocyte, which was not observed in C. cosyra. Furthermore, compared to P. cosyrae-parasitized larvae, those of both host species parasitized by D. longicaudata had lower encapsulation rates, hemocyte counts and spreading abilities and yielded a higher number of parasitoid progeny with the highest parasitoid emergence (72.13%) recorded in C. cosyra. These results demonstrate that cellular immune responses are central to host-parasitoid interaction in tephritid fruit flies and further suggest that D. longicaudata presents greater potential as a biocontrol agent of B. dorsalis and C. cosyra in horticultural cropping systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".