Exploring behavioural and physiological adaptations in mountain pine beetle in response to elevated ozone concentrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elevated ozone (eO3) concentrations pose a threat to insect populations by potentially altering their behaviour and physiology. This study investigates the effects of eO3 concentrations on the mountain pine beetle which is a major tree-killing species of conifers in northwestern North America. We are particularly interested in understanding the effects of eO3 concentrations on beetle behaviour and physiology and possible transgenerational impacts on bark beetle broods. We conducted O3-enrichment experiments in a controlled laboratory setting using different O3 concentrations (100–200 ppb; projected for 2050–2100) and assessed various beetle responses, including CO2 respiration, mating behaviour, survival probability, locomotion, and attraction behaviour. Transgenerational impacts on the first and second generations were also analyzed by studying brood morphology, mating behaviour, survival, and pheromone production. We found that beetles exposed to eO3 concentrations had shorter oviposition galleries and reduced brood production. Beetle pheromones were also degraded by eO3 exposure. However, exposure to eO3 also prompted various adaptive responses in beetles. Despite reduced respiration, eO3 improved locomotor activity and the olfactory response of beetles. Surprisingly, beetle survival probability was also improved both in the parents and their broods. We also observed transgenerational plasticity in the broods of eO3-exposed parents, suggesting potential stress resistance mechanisms. This was evident by similar mating success, oviposition gallery length, and brood numbers produced in both control and eO3 concentration treatments. This study demonstrates the sensitivity of mountain pine beetles to increased O3 concentrations, contributing crucial insights into the ecological implications of eO3 concentrations on their populations. Overall, the outcome of this study contributes to informed climate change mitigation strategies and adaptive management practices for the development of resilient forests in response to emerging forest insect pests worldwide.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".