MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401550359 · doi:10.1002/ece3.70079

Parasites and the ecology of fear: Nonconsumptive effects of ectoparasites on larvae reduce growth in simulated <i>Drosophila</i> populations

2024· article· en· W4401550359 on OpenAlexafffund
Collin J. Horn, Lien T. Luong, Darcy R. Visscher

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPredationBiologyEcologyLarvaPredatorAffect (linguistics)Host (biology)ZoologyPsychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Predators negatively affect prey outside of direct attack, and these nonconsumptive effects (NCEs) may cause over half the impacts of predators on prey populations. This “ecology of fear” framework has been extended to host–parasite interactions. The NCEs of parasites are thought to be small relative to those of predators. However, recent research shows ectoparasites exert NCEs on multiple life stages of Drosophila. In this study, we apply recent data to a matrix‐based model of fly populations experiencing infection/consumption and NCEs from an ectoparasitic mite. We found the NCEs of parasites on larvae, which are not actively parasitized, decreased the size of simulated host populations. By contrast, the NCEs on adult flies increased population size through compensatory egg production. The negative NCEs on larvae outweighed the positive effects on adults to reduce population size. This study suggests that parasitic NCEs can suppress host populations independent of infection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207