MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

What attracts the allies of Aristolochia contorta ?

2024· preprint· en· W4403472550 on OpenAlexaff
Si‐Hyun Park, Jae Yeon Jang, Hangah Lim, Sang Kyu Kim, Jae Geun Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNephrotoxicity and Medicinal Plants
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOlfactometerAttractionAristolochiaBiologyLarvaBotanyEcologyHost (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. In the evolutionary arms race between plants and herbivores, sophisticated mechanisms of indirect defense play a pivotal role. This study investigated the intricate ecological dynamics between Aristolochia contorta, Sericinus montela, and Ooencyrtus spp., with a special focus on the role of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in plant. 2. This study utilized field surveys, olfactometer experiments, and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis to investigate the role of volatile organic compounds. 3. Field surveys showed a 54.6% egg parasitism rate, with quadrats containing A. contorta and larvae attracting more Ooencyrtus spp. than those with the plant alone. In olfactometer bioassays, Ooencyrtus spp. demonstrated a notable preference for leaves damaged by a pattern wheel, attracting 46.8% of Ooencyrtus spp. compared to undamaged controls. Moreover, leaves treated with larval saliva were found to be similarly attractive, drawing in 48.7% of Ooencyrtus spp.. In addition, the difference in attraction between leaves with and without larval saliva did not reach statistical significance. GC-MS analysis identified essential VOCs in the damaged leaves, including hexyl acetate, cyclohexene, δ-cadinene, α-pinene, and β-caryophyllene. Additionally, leaves treated with larval saliva revealed the presence of exo-isocitral (0.61%), and β-pinene (0.14%), though in minimal amounts. Despite these complex responses, our analysis suggests that the compounds introduced or increased in concentration by larval saliva do not significantly boost the attraction of Ooencyrtus spp. 4. This finding implies that while the VOCs response to damage and saliva application is multifaceted, serving multiple defensive functions, the quantities of these saliva-induced compounds could be insufficient to substantially influence the behavior of Ooencyrtus spp. towards the damaged leaves. This research furthers our understanding of the indirect defense strategies of plants, particularly highlighting the vital roles of VOCs in A. contorta . Moreover, our findings suggest new avenues for exploring the ecological and evolutionary roles of chemical signals, shedding light on the complex interactions facilitated by these chemical cues in plant defense mechanisms.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNephrotoxicity and Medicinal PlantsFrench-language works237,207