Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) Microplus Ticks can Complete their Life Cycle on the Water Buffalo (Bubalus bubalis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus is considered one of the most important ectoparasites of cattle worldwide. Due to the increase in the number of water buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis) in R. microplus-infested areas, this study was designed to determine whether these ruminants are able to sustain the complete tick life cycle. To this aim, a seven-month old water buffalo of the Mediterranean breed and a Holstein bovine of the same age, both tick-naïve, were infested with R. microplus tick larvae, and the parasitic and non-parasitic tick stages were analyzed and compared. The studied parameters include the number of recovered engorged females, the time points at which the first and last engorged females fell to the ground; the pre-oviposition duration, the percentage of hatching and the reproductive efficiency index. No statistically significant differences were found between the buffalo and the bovine in all parameters measured. It was concluded that the water buffalo can act as a suitable reservoir for R. microplus ticks. These results should be taken into account when implementing tick control and eradication campaigns in water buffalo grazing lands.
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) | 0.002 | 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".