Turbulent plumes of heat, moist heat, and carbon dioxide elicit upwind anemotaxis in tsetse flies<i>Glossina morsitans morsitans</i>Westwood (Diptera: Glossinidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The roles and interactions of turbulent plumes of heat, moist heat, and carbon dioxide in mediating upwind flight of adult tsetse flies (Glossina morsitans morsitans Westwood) were investigated using a wind tunnel in a constant-environment chamber. Heat fluctuations in the plume that were detected by a thermocouple and displayed as oscilloscope traces allowed direct visualization of the structures of the plumes. Significantly more flies flew upwind when exposed to plumes of (i) carbon dioxide (0.0051% above background) and air (58% relative humidity) compared with air alone; (ii) carbon dioxide and heated air (35% relative humidity and temperature fluctuating up to 0.09°C above background) compared with carbon dioxide and air; and (iii) carbon dioxide and moist (82% relative humidity) heated air (temperature fluctuating up to 0.05°C above background) compared with carbon dioxide and heated air. However, there were no significant differences in upwind flight of flies exposed to plumes of (i) air compared with humidified air (65% relative humidity); (ii) carbon dioxide and heated air compared with heated air alone; and (iii) carbon dioxide and moist heated air compared with moist heated air alone. Recorded temperature fluctuations in heat plumes transported downwind from a tethered steer in a pasture showed patterns similar to those produced in the wind-tunnel plumes. These results suggest that host emissions of carbon dioxide alone and combined heat and moisture carried downwind by low-velocity winds elicit upwind anemotaxis in tsetse flies, which distinguish these emissions from a background of lower atmospheric levels.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".