Arthropods of Medicoveterinary Importance in Zoos
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zoos present a unique assemblage of arthropods, captive vertebrates, free-roaming wildlife, humans, and plants, each with its own biota of symbiotic organisms. Arthropods of medicoveterinary importance are well represented in zoos, and an ample literature documents their influence in these animal-rich environments. Mosquitoes are of greatest significance because of the animal and human pathogens they transmit, followed by ectoparasites, many of which are exotic and present health risks to captive and native animals. Biting flies, cockroaches, filth flies, and triatomid bugs represent additional concerns. Integrated management programs for arthropods in zoos are commonplace. Zoos can play a role in biosurveillance, serving as an advanced guard for detecting exotic arthropods and vector-borne diseases. We provide the first review of arthropods of medicoveterinary importance in zoos. A case is made for the value of collaborations between entomologists and zoo personnel as a means of enhancing research and public education while safeguarding the health of captive animals and the public.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it