Winter survival of nuisance fly parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) in Canada and Denmark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Independent studies were performed in Canada and in Denmark to assess the survival of parasitic wasps (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae) wintering in puparia of house fly, Musca domestica Linnaeus (Diptera: Muscidae). Data in Canada were collected for Muscidifurax raptorGirault & Saunders, M. raptorellus Kogan & Legner, M. zaraptor Kogan & Legner, Nasonia vitripennis(Walker), Spalangia cameroni Perkins, Trichomalopsis sarcophagae (Gahan) and Urolepis rufipes (Ashmead) in three microsites at an outdoor cattle facility in southern Alberta. Survival was highest for N. vitripennis, T. sarcophagae and U. rufipes, ranging from near zero to c. 7%. No survival was observed for S. cameroni. Daily mean values for ambient air temperature (DMAT) averaged about -3.5 degrees C during exposure periods. Data for Denmark were collected for M. raptor, S. cameroni and U. rufipes in a dairy barn and in a swine barn. Survival of M. raptor and U. rufipes was higher than that of S. cameroni in the dairy barn (DMAT = 8.6 degrees C), with the three species having similar survival in the swine barn (DMAT = 15.4 degrees C). In both studies, parasitoids in egg stages were least likely to survive. These results identify the potential for T. sarcophagae and U. rufipes to be commercialized for use in northern climates as biocontrol agents for nuisance flies, compare directly the cold-hardiness of commercialized species (i.e. all of the above species excluding T. sarcophagae and U. rufipes), and document the importance of microsite on winter survival.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".