MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173523457 · doi:10.1139/z09-046

Encapsulation ability: Are all Drosophila species equally armed? An investigation in the obscura group

2009· article· en· W2173523457 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sébastien Havard, Patrice Eslin, Geneviève Prévost, G. Doury

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicInvertebrate Immune Response Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDrosophila subobscuraDrosophila (subgenus)Drosophila melanogasterDrosophilidaeBristleHemolymphZoologyEvolutionary biologyBotanyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unable to form cellular capsules around large foreign bodies, the species Drosophila subobscura Collin in Gordon, 1936 was previously shown devoid of lamellocytes, the capsule-forming hemocytes in Drosophila melanogaster Meigen, 1830. This unusual case of deficiency in encapsulation ability was remarkable enough to motivate further investigations in phylogenetically related species of the obscura group. Like D. subobscura, the species Drosophila azteca Sturtevant and Dobzhansky, 1936, Drosophila bifasciata Pomini, 1940, Drosophila guanche Monclus, 1976, Drosophila miranda Dobzhansky, 1935, Drosophila persimilis Dobzhansky and Epling, 1944, and Drosophila pseudoobcura Frovola and Astaurov, 1929 were found to be unable to encapsulate large foreign bodies and also to lack lamellocytes. Surprisingly, Drosophila affinis Sturtevant, 1916, Drosophila tolteca Patterson and Mainland, 1944, and Drosophila obscura Fallen, 1823 were capable of mounting cellular capsules, although their encapsulation abilities remained weak. These three species were free of lamellocytes but possessed small pools of never before described “atypical hemocytes” present in the hemolymph when capsules were formed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicInvertebrate Immune Response MechanismsFrench-language works237,207