MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082364487 · doi:10.1673/031.010.1101

A Review of the Natural History and Laboratory Culture Methods for the Yellow Dung Fly,<i>Scathophaga stercoraria</i>

2010· review· en· W2082364487 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Insect Science · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersSociety of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
KeywordsBiologyContext (archaeology)Natural historyLivestockZoologyOrganismEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria (L.) (Diptera: Scathophagidae) is a widespread and locally abundant fly associated with the dung of large mammals, especially farm animals. This species has recently become a standard test organism for evaluating toxic effects of veterinary pharmaceuticals in livestock dung. In this context, a review of its natural history and a general description of the field and laboratory rearing methods of this species are provided here to benefit the scientific community as well as government regulators and applicants of eco-toxicological studies. For guidance, means and ranges are included for all relevant standard life history traits stemming from previously published data on Swiss populations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it