MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

TSETSE GENETICS: Contributions to Biology, Systematics, and Control of Tsetse Flies

2004· review· en· W2110383954 on OpenAlexaff
R. H. Gooding, E. S. Krafsur

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Entomology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsBiologyGlossinidaeFecundityPopulation geneticsEntomologyPopulationEcologyLivestockVector (molecular biology)ZoologyTsetse flyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tsetse flies (Diptera: Glossinidae) constitute a small, ancient taxon of exclusively hematophagous insects that reproduce slowly and viviparously. Because tsetse flies are the only vectors of pathogenic African trypanosomes, they are a potent and constant threat to humans and livestock over much of sub-Saharan Africa. Despite their low fecundity, tsetse flies demonstrate great resilience, which makes population suppression expensive, transient, and beyond the capacities of private and public sectors to accomplish, except over small areas. Nevertheless, control measures that include genetic methods are under consideration at national and supranational levels. There is a pressing need for sufficient laboratory cultures of tsetse flies and financial support to carry out genetic research. Here we review tsetse genetics from organismal and population points of view and identify some research needs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations132
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of EntomologySame topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207