Adult female exposure to mild ultraviolet radiation reduces longevity but not egg load in two parasitoid wasps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Insects can be exposed to ultraviolet (UV) radiation throughout their lifecycle when they rest, forage, and mate. The negative effects that such highly energetic photons can have on insect fitness are not well‐known, especially for natural exposure during the adult stage. Adult insects are considered to be more resistant to UV radiation than their immature stages, but this assumption is supported by only a few studies on a restricted set of pest species. We conducted the first investigation of the vulnerability of parasitoid adults to UV exposure, by assessing the longevity and potential fecundity of female Telenomus podisi Ashmead and Trissolcus utahensis Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) receiving low doses of UV‐A and visible radiation daily in the laboratory. Parasitoids died up to 2× faster with increasing levels of UV radiation, and, to a lesser extent, of visible radiation. There was no effect of UV radiation on maximum egg load resulting from oogenesis in early adulthood. This study on beneficial insects indicates that the physiological consequences of cumulative exposure to even mild doses of more energetic optical radiation, particularly in the UV range, should not be underestimated in natural and managed ecosystems.
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".