Sugar Deprivation Reduces Insemination of<i>Anopheles gambiae</i>(Diptera: Culicidae), Despite Daily Recruitment of Adults, and Predicts Decline in Model Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our research tests the hypothesis that the inability to sugar-feed reduces the insemination rate in mosquito populations. To test this, we measured the effects of sugar availability on cumulative insemination performance of male Anopheles gambiae Giles s.s. (Diptera: Culicidae) during 10-d periods of continual emergence of equal numbers of both sexes, and we evaluated the implications at the population level with a matrix population model. On each day of each of four replicates, 20 newly emerged mosquitoes of each sex were recruited into the populations within two mesocosms, large walk-in enclosures with simulated natural conditions. Each mesocosm contained a cage to replicate the experiment on a small scale. Scented sucrose was absent or present (control). A human host was available nightly as a bloodmeal source in both mesocosms. Sugar availability and enclosure size significantly influenced female insemination. In the mesocosms, with sugar 49.7% of the females were inseminated, compared with 10.9% of the females without sugar. In the small cages, the insemination rates were 76.0 and 23.5%, respectively. In the mesocosms, cumulative survival of females after 10 d was 51.6% with sugar and 25.6% without sugar. In the cages, female survival was 95 and 73%, respectively. Sensitivity analysis of the population projection matrix shows that both reduced male survival and reduced mating capability due to a lack of sugar contributed to lower insemination rates in females, and in the absence of sugar the insemination rate was lowered to an extent that led to population decline.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".