<i>Manduca sexta</i>caterpillars parasitized by the wasp<i>Cotesia congregata</i>stop chewing despite an intact motor system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The parasitic wasp Cotesia congregata suppresses feeding in its host, the caterpillar Manduca sexta, during specific periods of wasp development. We examined both feeding behaviour and the neurophysiology of the mandibular closer muscle in parasitized and unparasitized control M. sexta to determine how the wasp may accomplish this. To test whether the wasps activated a pre-existing host mechanism for feeding cessation, we examined the microstructure of feeding behaviour in caterpillars that stopped feeding due to illness-induced anorexia or an impending moult. These microstructures were compared with that shown by parasitized caterpillars. While there were overall differences between parasitized and unparasitized caterpillars, the groups showed similar progression in feeding microstructure as feeding ended, suggesting a common pattern for terminating a meal. Parasitized caterpillars also consumed less leaf area in 100 bites than control caterpillars at around the same time their feeding microstructure changed. The decline in food consumption was accompanied by fewer spikes per burst and shorter burst durations in chewing muscle electromyograms. Similar extracellular results were obtained from the motorneuron of the mandibular closer muscle. However, chewing was dramatically re-activated in non-feeding parasitized caterpillars if the connectives posterior to the suboesophageal ganglion were severed. The same result was observed in unparasitized caterpillars given the same treatment. Our results suggest that the reduced feeding in parasitized caterpillars is not due to damage to the central pattern generator (CPG) for chewing, motor nerves or chewing muscles, but is more likely to be due to a suppression of chewing CPG activity by ascending or descending inputs.
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".