Lethal and sublethal toxic effects of a test chemical (ivermectin) on the yellow dung fly (<i>Scathophaga stercoraria</i>) based on a standardized international ring test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A standardized bioassay using the yellow dung fly, Scathophaga stercoraria L. (Diptera: Scathophagidae), was developed to test the lethal and sublethal toxicity of parasiticide residues in livestock dung. The repeatability of the bioassay was assessed for the parasiticide ivermectin in 13 tests performed by seven laboratories in Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Canada. Test results had an acceptable range of heterogeneity. The calculated median effective concentration for 50% (EC50) egg-to-adult mortality was 20.9 +/- 19.1 microg ivermectin/kg dung fresh weight (FW) (mean +/- standard deviation; range, 6.33-67.5 microg/kg). Mortality was not observed below a calculated no-observable-effect concentration (NOEC) of 8.1 +/- 7.7 microg/kg FW. However, prolonged development time (and, in a subset of tests, reduced body size) was observed above a calculated NOEC of 0.8 +/- 0.8 microg/kg FW. An oviposition site choice test revealed that yellow dung fly females do not discriminate among dung of different ivermectin concentrations. Thus, the yellow dung fly is suitably sensitive, and the methods are sufficiently repeatable, to support use of this standardized bioassay by the international community in the registration of new veterinary pharmaceuticals.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".