Geographic variation in rodent-flea relationships in the presence of black-tailed prairie dog colonies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We characterized the relationship between fleas and their rodent hosts in the presence of prairie dog colonies and compared them to adjacent assemblages away from colonies. We evaluated the rodent-flea relationship by quantifying prevalence, probability of infestation, flea load, and intensity of fleas on rodents. As prairie dog burrows provide refugia for fleas, we hypothesized that prevalence, flea load, and intensity would be higher for rodents that are associated with black-tailed prairie dog colonies. Rodents were trapped at off- and on-colony grids, resulting in the collection of 4,509 fleas from 1,430 rodents in six study areas. The rodent community composition varied between these study areas. Flea species richness was not different between prairie dog colonies and the surrounding grasslands (p = 0.883) but was positively correlated with rodent species richness (p = 0.055). Prairie dog colonies did not increase the prevalence of fleas (p > 0.10). Flea loads on rodents did not vary between off- and on-colony grids at three of the study areas (p > 0.10). Based on the prevalence, infestation rates, and flea loads, we identified Peromyscus maniculatus, Onychomys leucogaster, and two Neotoma species as important rodent hosts for fleas and Aetheca wagneri, Orchopeus leucopus, Peromyscopsylla hesperomys, Pleochaetis exilis, and Thrassisfotus as the most important fleas associated with these rodents. Prairie dog colonies did not seem to facilitate transmission of fleas between rodent hosts, and the few rodent-flea associations exhibited significant differences between off- and on-colony grids.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it