Abundance and stability of populations of chewing lice (Phthiraptera: Amblycera and Ischnocera) infesting two species of woodpeckers (Aves: Piciformes: Picidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The annual abundance of chewing lice (Phthiraptera) was recorded from 1996 to 2015 in Manitoba, Canada, on two species of woodpeckers (Piciformes: Picidae). Yellow-bellied sapsuckers (Sphyrapicus varius (Linnaeus)) were infested with Menacanthus pici (Denny) (Amblycera: Menoponidae) and Penenirmus auritus (Scopoli) (Ischnocera: Philopteridae); northern flickers (Colaptes auratus (Linnaeus)) were also infested with M. pici, as well as two other Ischnocera, Penenirmus jungens (Kellogg) and Picicola porisma Dalgleish. The mean annual abundance varied from nine to 51 lice per bird for the four species, with prevalence, mean intensity, sex ratio, and nymphs per female also varying among louse species. Menacanthus pici populations on both hosts were unstable: abundance rose over two decades because of increasing prevalence, whereas the abundance of the other three louse species fluctuated around a mean. Population variability was similar for the lice on both hosts, with the metric, PV, ranging from 0.41 to 0.51 on a 0–1 scale, once the effect of the trend in abundance for M. pici had been removed. Although the population dynamics for species of lice on these two woodpeckers were distinct, inter-specific differences in population stability were less pronounced than observed in the few other species of bird lice studied in this way.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".