Crowding as a possible stress factor in food choice of aphidophagous ladybird beetle, <i>Propylea dissecta</i> (Mulsant)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crowding induces behavioural and lasting morphological and chromatic changes in insects. This study examined how larval rearing density of Propylea dissecta (Mulsant, 1850) affected food choice and development duration, hypothesising that larvae under stress will opt for lower quality food as larval density increases. Larvae were reared at various densities under three crowding treatments: direct physical, indirect physical, and chemical tracks. In each treatment, larvae experienced crowding at densities of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 individuals per arena. Fourth stage larvae were provided with food choice of aphids, heterospecific eggs, and conspecific eggs. Significant effect of crowding on total development duration, first consumption time, and first food consumption was observed. Decrease in development duration at densities of 4 and 6 and increase in development duration at low and high densities were observed in direct physical crowding. Indirect physical and chemical crowding yield the shortest development duration at densities of 8, 10, and 12, when compared to low and moderate crowding. First encounter time increased with increasing chemical tracks concentration, while first consumption time decreases with crowding across all groups. First consumed food was also significantly influenced by crowding, suggesting a negative impact on larval food choice. Our results indicate that crowding among larvae leads to a longer development duration and show less selectivity in their food choices.
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".