Effects of <i>Rhizobium</i> symbiosis and nitrogen augmentation of faba bean on host acceptance and feeding preference of the pea leaf weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legumes depend on symbiotic rhizobia to fulfill nitrogen requirements for plant growth and reproduction. This symbiosis not only influences plant nutrition but also mediates plant defense against herbivores. The pea leaf weevil, Sitona lineatus (Linnaeus) , is an oligophagous herbivore of legumes. Adults feed aboveground on the foliage of a variety of legume species. Larvae feed below ground on root nodules of field pea ( Lathyrus oleraceus, Lamb (syn. Pisum sativum, Linnaeus)) and faba bean ( Vicia faba, Linnaeus) and the associated Rhizobium leguminosarum Frank (Rhizobiales: Rhizobiacea) bacteria. We tested the effect of rhizobia symbiosis and soil nitrogen augmentation on weevil host acceptance, feeding preference, larval development, and the plant performance of faba bean in field and laboratory studies. While adult pea leaf weevils showed no preference in laboratory assays, they preferred rhizobia-inoculated faba bean plants in the field. Rhizobia inoculation increased faba bean yield despite having no effect on nodule production. Nitrogen amendment increased male feeding and female oviposition in laboratory assays. Nitrogen amendment did not protect faba bean yield, even though it decreased larval development and root nodulation. More adults were collected from rhizobia-inoculated plants compared to nitrogen-treated plants. These findings suggest that nutrition-defense trade-offs in faba bean may drive host selection behaviours and pest dynamics of pea leaf weevil. We discuss the role of rhizobia in enhancing plant defense and maintaining yield stability. We also discuss potential negative impact of rhizobia on plant fitness, as rhizobia may produce nutritionally rich plants that are more susceptible to pea leaf weevil damage.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".