An introduced parasitoid facilitates host range expansion of a resident parasitoid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Invasive species can cause maladaptive behaviours in native consumers, with evolution of behavioural or physiological traits thought to be the main way out of these so-called ‘evolutionary traps’. However, shorter-term ecological processes resulting from biological invasions could provide other ways to escape evolutionary traps. Asobara cf. rufescens , a resident (i.e., possibly native or previously introduced) parasitoid of drosophilid fly larvae in North America, can rarely produce offspring on the invasive fruit pest Drosophila suzukii in the laboratory, but in often emerges from field-collected D. suzukii . We hypothesized that the successful development of A. cf. rufescens in D. suzukii in the field is facilitated by Leptopilina japonica , a recently introduced parasitoid of D. suzukii . In laboratory experiments, we found that A. cf. rufescens had more than 30-fold higher offspring emergence from D. suzukii when L. japonica was also present. This facilitation occurred most frequently when A. cf. rufescens parasitized D. suzukii after L. japonica , possibly because parasitism by L. japonica destroyed the hosts’ cellular immunity that would otherwise prevent A. cf. rufescens development. The recent arrival of L. japonica may have partially rescued A. cf. rufescens from the evolutionary trap set by D. suzukii and, consequently, resulted in an expansion of its host range.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".