Host adaptation and specialization in Tetranychidae mites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composite generalist herbivores are comprised of host-adapted populations that retain the ability to shift hosts. The degree and overlap of mechanisms used by host-adapted generalist and specialist herbivores to overcome the same host plant defenses are largely unknown. Tetranychidae mites are exceptionally suited to address the relationship between host adaptation and specialization in herbivores as this group harbors closely related species with remarkably different host ranges-an extreme generalist the two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae Koch [Tu]) and the Solanaceous specialist Tetranychus evansi (Te). Here, we used tomato-adapted two-spotted spider mite (Tu-A) and Te populations to compare mechanisms underlying their host adaptation and specialization. We show that both mites attenuate induced tomato defenses, including protease inhibitors (PIs) that target mite cathepsin L digestive proteases. While Te solely relies on transcriptional attenuation of PI induction, Tu and Tu-A have elevated constitutive activity of cathepsin L proteases, making them less susceptible to plant anti-digestive proteins. Tu-A and Te also rely on detoxification of tomato constitutive defenses. Te uses esterase and P450 activities, while Tu-A depends on the activity of all major detoxification enzymatic classes to disarm tomato defensive compounds to a lesser extent. Thus, even though both Tu-A and Te use similar mechanisms to counteract tomato defenses, Te can better cope with them. This finding is congruent with the ecological and evolutionary times required to establish mite adaptation and specialization states, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".