Effects of Elevated CO2 and O3 on Aboveground Brassicaceous Plant–Insect Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atmospheric gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and ozone (O 3 ), influence plant–insect interactions, with variable effects. The few studies that have investigated the direct effects of elevated CO 2 (eCO 2 ; 750–900 ppm) or elevated O 3 (eO 3 ; 60–200 ppb) on insects have shown mixed results. Instead, most research has focused on the indirect effects through changes in the host plant. In general, the lower nitrogen levels in C3 brassicaceous plants grown at eCO 2 negatively affect insects and may result in compensatory feeding. Phytohormones involved in plant resistance may be altered by eCO 2 or eO 3 . For example, stress-related jasmonate levels, which lead to induced resistance against chewing herbivores, are weakened at eCO 2 . In general, eCO 2 does not affect herbivore-induced plant volatiles, which remain attractive to natural enemies. However, floral volatiles and herbivore-induced plant volatiles may be degraded by O 3 , affecting pollination and foraging natural enemy behavior. Thus, eCO 2 and eO 3 alter plant–insect interactions; however, many aspects remain poorly understood.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".