Influence of elevation and avian or mammalian hosts on attraction of <i>Culex pipiens</i> (Diptera: Culicidae) in southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We studied Culex pipiens L. in the Niagara Region of Ontario, Canada, to establish whether or not these mosquitoes are attracted to hosts other than birds at different elevations or as the season progresses. Guinea-pigs and chickens were used as representative mammalian and avian hosts, respectively. Bait animals were placed next to modified CDC miniature light traps (no light and no CO2) hung 1.5 or 5 m above ground in a Niagara woodlot. The season was divided into three 6-week periods (early, middle, and late). Significantly more C. pipiens were captured at the 5 m than at the 1.5 m elevation. In general, chicken-baited traps were preferred over control and guinea-pig-baited traps, with one important exception: there was no significant difference among traps during the late period at 1.5 m elevation. The potential role of C. pipiens as a bridging vector of West Nile virus to humans is discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".