Characterization of larval habitats of Anopheles albimanus, Anopheles pseudopunctipennis, Anopheles punctimacula, and Anopheles oswaldoi s.l. populations in lowland and highland Ecuador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent collection data indicate that at least four potential malaria vectors occupy more widespread distributions within the Andean highlands than in the past. Since habitat elimination is an important aspect of malaria control, it is vital to characterize larval habitats for Anopheles species within both lowland and highland sites. To that end, 276 sites within Ecuador were surveyed between 2008 and 2010. Characteristics of Anopheles-present sites for four species were compared to Anopheles-absent sites within the same geographical range and also to Anopheles-absent sites within a highland range representing potential future habitats. Thermochron iButtons(©) were used to describe the daily temperature variation within a subset of potential habitats. Anopheles albimanus (W.) was positively associated with permanent habitats, sand substrates, floating algae (cyanobacterial mats), and warmer temperatures in both comparisons. Anopheles pseudopunctipennis (T.) was associated with floating algae (cyanobacterial mats), warmer temperatures, and higher water clarity in both comparisons. Anopheles punctimacula (D.&K.) was negatively associated with floating algae and positively associated with dissolved oxygen in both comparisons. Anopheles oswaldoi s.l. (P.) was not significantly associated with any parameters more often than expected given larval-absent sites. The results indicate that minimum water temperatures might limit the upper altitudinal distribution of An. albimanus (18.7° C) and An. pseudopunctipennis (16.0° C).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".