Supplemental data for: Friend or foe? Investigating Lasius neoniger (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) interspecies dynamics in a greenhouse agroecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dataset contains the raw data from a study conducted by Speranza Martin, Aaron Fairweather, and Ryan Prosser. The study is titled Friend or Foe? Investigating Lasius neoniger (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) Interspecies Dynamics in a Greenhouse Agroecosystem. Abstract: Ant–aphid interactions are common in agroecosystems, yet the species-specific ecological and agronomic interactions remain understudied in North America, particularly in an agricultural hotspot like Ontario. This study investigates the relationship between a common ant, Lasius neoniger, and the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae. This study explores how these interactions affect aphid population dynamics and the growth of greenhouse-grown bell pepper, Capsicum annuum plants. Using a controlled laboratory experiment with four treatment groups (control, ants only, aphids only, ants + aphids), we measured aphid density, ant colony development, and pepper plant leaf number, stem length, and root density. Aphid densities were significantly lower in the presence of ants, suggesting that L. neoniger may suppress M. persicae populations, likely through predation rather than mutualistic tending. This challenges the common assumption of obligate mutualism in ant–aphid relationships and suggests that ant-aphid interactions are species-specific. Despite reduced aphid numbers, plant growth metrics did not differ significantly across treatments. These findings offer new insight into the context-dependent nature of ant–aphid interactions, suggesting that under certain conditions, ants could suppress aphids. This research contributes to a growing body of literature on multi-trophic interactions. It highlights the potential for native ants like L. neoniger to play a role in sustainable greenhouse agriculture. Future studies should incorporate behavioural observations, longer observation timelines, and multi-species comparisons to further clarify the ecological mechanisms and practical applications of these interactions. The manuscript associated with this study will be published in the journal of the Entomological Society of Ontario.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.508 | 0.137 |
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".