Identification of compounds produced by male hairpencil glands of corn earworm, <scp> <i>Helicoverpa zea</i> </scp> and their role in male autodetection and female mate acceptance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Heliothine moths represent some of the world's most important agricultural pest species. Helicoverpa zea (Corn Earworm) and Heliothis virescens (Tobacco Budworm) cause billions in damage and control costs worldwide each year. Given their economic importance, sex pheromones of many species have been studied for the development of management techniques such as trapping for population monitoring. The majority of pheromones identified and studied to date have been female‐produced sex pheromones. Less emphasis has been placed on male sex pheromones, associated with abdominal hairpencil structures that often function in courtship or to attract females. The present study examines the composition, detection and behavioural role of male H. zea hairpencil compounds in male autodetection and in courtship. Comparative examination of the hairpencil effluvia of H. zea and H. virescens did not reveal distinct differences in pheromone blend composition produced by males of these species. Electrophysiological testing demonstrated broad antennal neuron response in both males and females of H. zea to nine key stimuli, with sexual dimorphism present in each species. Behavioural assays suggested that odours released by male hairpencils are important in mate acceptance by female H. zea and may play a role in mate choice and species isolation. Wind tunnel observations indicated that key H. zea hairpencil odours (hexadecanyl acetate and octadecanyl acetate) also function in mate competition, antagonising responses of downwind conspecific males following a synthetic female sex pheromone plume. This finding provides insight regarding male–male detection and response to hairpencil compounds in H. zea .
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".