MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1886054481 · doi:10.5376/ijms.2015.05.0057

Effect of twelve species of marine phytoplankton on larval survival and development of the mosquito <i>Culex quinquefasciatus</i>

2015· article· en· W1886054481 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
V.R. Sushanth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marine Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Utilization and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCulex quinquefasciatusLarvaBiologyPhytoplanktonEcologyZoologyAedes aegypti

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, effect of twelve species of marine phytoplankton on the growth and development of mosquito larvae of Culex quinquefasciatus was investigated. Among the 12 phytoplankton isolates, mortality of the larvae was observed in the suspensions of cyanobacteria species namely, Nostoc commune, Phormidium corium, P. tenue and planktonic green alga Nannochloropsis oceanica. N. oceanica showed effective larvicidal activity with 100% mortality of larvae. The development of larvae fed with phytoplankton cells was delayed compared to the control with respect to the first pupation period. The wing length of the adults emerged from the larvae fed with phytoplankton cells were shorter than control and those of adults emerged from Chroococcus turgidus, Oscillatoria geminata, Chaetoceros calcitrans and Skeletonema costatum treatment were similar in size to that of control. The present study showed that some species may serve as nutritious food for mosquito larvae, whereas others especially N. oceanica has the potential to be used as natural pesticide to control mosquito C. quinquefasciatus ..

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicInsect Utilization and EffectsFrench-language works237,207