A novel method for infecting Drosophila adult flies with insect pathogenic nematodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drosophila has been established as an excellent genetic and genomic model to investigate host-pathogen interactions and innate immune defense mechanisms. To date, most information on the Drosophila immune response derives from studies that involve bacterial, fungal or viral pathogens. However, immune reactions to insect parasitic nematodes are still not well characterized. The nematodes Heterorhabditis bacteriophora live in symbiosis with the entomopathogenic bacteria Photorhabdus luminescens, and they are able to invade and kill insects. Interestingly, Heterorhabditis nematodes are viable in the absence of Photorhabdus. Techniques for infecting Drosophila larvae with these nematodes have been previously reported. Here, we have developed a method for infecting Drosophila adult flies with Heterorhabditis nematodes carrying (symbiotic worms) or lacking (axenic worms) their associated bacteria. The protocol we present can be readily adapted for studying parasitic strategies of other insect nematodes using Drosophila as the host infection model.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".