Diversity and Host use of Mites (Acari: Mesostigmata, Oribatida) Phoretic on Bark Beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytinae): Global Generalists, Local Specialists?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mites (Arachnida: Acari) are one of the most diverse groups of organisms associated with bark beetles (Curculionidae: Scolytinae), but their taxonomy and ecology are poorly understood, including in Canada. Here we address this by describing the diversity, species composition, and host associations of mesostigmatic and oribatid mites collected from scolytines across four sites in eastern Ontario, Canada, in 2008 and 2009. Using Lindgren funnel traps baited with α-pinene, ethanol lures, or Ips pini (Say) pheromone lures, a total of 5,635 bark beetles (30 species) were collected, and 16.4% of these beetles had at least one mite. From these beetles, a total of 2,424 mites representing 33 species from seven families were collected. The majority of mite species had a narrow host range from one (33.3%) or two (36.4%) host species, and fewer species had a host range of three or more hosts (30.3%). This study represents the first broad investigation of the acarofauna of scolytines in Canada, and we expand upon the known (worldwide) host records of described mite species by 19%, and uncover 12 new species. Half (7) of the 14 most common mites collected in this study showed a marked preference for a single host species, which contradicts the hypothesis that nonparasitic mites are typically not host specific, at least locally. Moreover, host records from the literature and those of this study together suggest that at a global scale, bark beetle mites have a broad host range, while at a local scale many species are host specific.
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 | 0.000 | 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".