MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105978853 · doi:10.1515/hf.2009.025

Horizontal transfer of boron by the Formosan subterranean termite (<i>Coptotermes formosanus</i> Shiraki) after feedingon treated wood

2008· article· en· W2105978853 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Margaret C. Gentz, J. Kenneth Grace, Mark E. Mankowski

Bibliographic record

VenueHolzforschung · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgricultural Research ServiceUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsCoptotermesBoronBoric acidRhinotermitidaeAnimal scienceAnhydrousToxicologyBiologyBotanyHorticultureChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The goal of the present study was to determine whether Coptotermes formosanus Shiraki workers exposed to boron-treated wood were capable of transferring quantifiable amounts of boron to non-exposed nestmates. This effect is called horizontal transfer. Borates are not repellent to termites, nor do they cause rapid mortality, making them excellent candidates for the study of horizontal transfer. In the present study, C. formosanus workers were collected from field colonies maintained in Honolulu, Hawaii and dyed with Sudan Red 7B over a 7-day period. These termites then underwent a 3-day exposure period to one of two types of composite board, either an experimental formulation of zinc borate and anhydrous boric acid or an untreated composite board. Treated termites were placed with an equal number of untreated termites for either 5 or 10 days; sham-dyed donors and recipients were used to control for possible effects of the dye. Horizontal transmission of boron and toxic effects were assessed based on termite wet weight, percent survival, and boron content. Horizontal transfer of boron was noted at both 5 and 10 days over those levels reported in untreated, field-caught termites from the same colony (ca. 7 μg boron g -1 termites). After 5 days, boron content was elevated in both dyed donor and recipient termites (ca. 92 and 38 μg boron g -1 dyed termites, respectively), as well as in undyed donors and recipients (ca. 84 and 30 μg boron g -1 undyed termites). The same pattern was observed after 10 days in both dyed donor and recipient termites (ca. 61 and 46 μg boron g -1 , respectively) and undyed donor and recipient termites (59 and 24 μg boron g -1 , respectively). Increased boron content of recipient termites after exposure to donor termites (fed on treated wood) demonstrated horizontal transfer of boron.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHolzforschungSame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207