Distributions of the paralysis ticks <i>Ixodes cornuatus </i>and <i>Ixodes holocyclus</i> in south‐eastern Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the actual and potential geographic distributions of Ixodes cornuatus and I holocyclus in south-eastern Australia. PROCEDURE: Examination of ticks from museum collections and trapped animals were made. (Bioclimatic analysis BIOCLIM) was used to predict potential distributions. RESULTS: I holocyclus was collected from rodents (Rattus fuscipes, R lutreolus, R rattus), wombats (Vombatus ursinus), cats and dogs in Gippsland and I cornuatus was collected from rodents (R fuscipes), wombats, cats and dogs in central Victoria. All life-cycle stages of both species were collected during the warmer months of the year. The known distribution of the two species was established from specimens in museum collections and suggested that a boundary between the two may exist in eastern Gippsland. BIOCLIM suggested that the area immediately to the east of Melbourne was climatically suitable for I holocyclus, although no endemic foci of infection are currently known from this region. The potential distribution of I cornuatus included east Gippsland and the Otway Ranges, areas in which the tick is not currently known to occur. CONCLUSIONS: I holocyclus and I cornuatus have more restricted distributions than current collections suggest and therefore may have the possibility to extend their geographical ranges in the future.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".