MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532964315 · doi:10.1080/17513758.2016.1237682

A mathematical model for the interplay of Nosema infection and forager losses in honey bee colonies

2016· article· en· W2532964315 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Petric, Ernesto Guzmán‐Novoa, Hermann J. Eberl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Dynamics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsHoney beeNosema ceranaeBiologyNosemaHoney BeesConstant (computer programming)ZoologyEcologyApplied mathematicsToxicologyStatisticsMathematicsMicrobiologyComputer scienceSporeMicrosporidia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a mathematical model (a) for the infection of a honey bee colony with Nosema ceranae. This is a system of five ordinary differential equations for the dependent variables healthy and infected worker bees in the hive, healthy and infected forager bees, and disease potential deposited in the hive. The model is then (b) extended to account for increased forager losses, e.g. caused by exposure to external stressors. The model is non-autonomous with periodic coefficient functions. Algebraic complexity prevents a rigorous mathematical analysis. Therefore, we resort to computer simulations in addition to some analytical results in the constant coefficient case. We investigate each of the two stressors (a) and (b) individually and jointly. Our results indicate that the combined effect of two stressors, both of which can be tolerated by the colony individually, might lead to colony failure, suggesting multi-factorial causes behind losses of honey bee colonies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological DynamicsSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207