Developmental correspondence of juvenile stages across the locust, harlequin ladybird, and diamondback moth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insect metamorphosis is a captivating aspect of animal research. To address the controversy regarding the developmental correspondence between hemimetabolous and holometabolous insects, we utilized non-destructive micro-computed tomography (CT) imaging and RNA-seq to examine wing growth and transcriptome profiles across juvenile stages in the Locusta migratoria , Harmonia axyridis , and Plutella xylostella , with distinct metamorphic strategies. Micro-CT revealed that over 88% of wing volume increase in ladybirds and moths occurs during the prepupal-pupal transition, similar to locust nymphs. Developmental transcriptome clustering demonstrated that gene expression patterns more closely resembled those between ladybird/moth prepupae/pupae and locust nymphs, whereas holometabolous larvae exhibited distinct profiles. Notably, gene expression specificity increased across juvenile stages with more recent species divergence. Genes highly expressed around the prepupal/pupal stages accumulated higher evolutionary rates. These integrated findings unveil commonalities in juvenile stage development among the locust, ladybird, and moth, providing insights into the evolution of metamorphosis within neopteran insects.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".