MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177657074 · doi:10.1603/0022-2585-41.6.1082

Persistence of <I>Escherichia coli</I> in Immature House Fly and Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae) in Relation to Larval Growth and Survival

2004· article· en· W2177657074 on OpenAlexaff
Kateryn Rochon, Tim Lysyk, L. Brent Selinger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Entomology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStable flyMuscidaeStomoxysBiologyMuscaLarvaPersistence (discontinuity)Escherichia coliIngestionAnimal scienceFly larvaeZoologyToxicologyMicrobiologyVeterinary medicineEcologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The persistence of Escherichia coli in artificially fed larvae was examined for up to 48 h after ingestion by house flies, Musca domestica L., and stable flies, Stomoxys calcitrans (L.). The rate of change in the E. coli load was similar for both species for up to 5 h after ingestion. Up to 48 h after ingestion, abundance of E. coli declined in immature house flies but remained constant in immature stable flies. When different E. coli concentrations were fed to larvae, the abundance of E. coli increased in stable fly larvae regardless of the initial concentration. The E. coli load in house fly larvae increased when larvae were fed a low concentration of bacteria, but it declined when larvae were fed a high concentration of bacteria. Survival of house fly and stable fly larvae averaged 62 and 25%, respectively, when reared on pure E. coli cultures. These observations suggest that house fly larvae digest E. coli and use it as a food source but stable fly larvae do not.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations35
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EntomologySame topicForensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesFrench-language works237,207