Spatial heterogeneity in the abundance and fecundity of Arctic mosquitoes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The abundance of mosquitoes is strongly influenced by biotic and abiotic factors that act on the immature (aquatic) and adult (terrestrial) life stages. Rapid changes in land use and climate, which impact aquatic and terrestrial mosquito habitat, necessitate studying the ecological mechanisms, and their interplay with the changing environment, that affect mosquito abundance. These data are crucial for anticipating how environmental change will impact their roles as pests, disease vectors, and in food webs. We studied a population of Arctic mosquitoes (Aedes nigripes, Diptera: Culicidae) in western Greenland, a region experiencing rapid environmental change, to quantify spatial variation in adult abundance and reproduction. Using sweep nets, we collected about sevenfold more mosquitoes within the town of Kangerlussuaq and within a low‐elevation tundra valley compared to three other tundra locations. Dissections of adult female mosquitoes revealed that only 17% were gravid overall, with a range of 7–43% among sites. If gravid, mosquitoes matured an average of 60 eggs per individual—more in larger females. We found no indication of autogenous egg development. Analyses using our field data indicated that spatial variation in adult fecundity and survival of immatures could each account for a 10‐fold range in the per capita growth of mosquito populations. The availability of vertebrate hosts and aquatic habitat is changing in many parts of the Arctic and can be expected to influence Arctic mosquito abundance. In the Arctic, and elsewhere, life‐history data from natural populations of mosquitoes will significantly aid in understanding controls on the abundance of these globally ubiquitous insects.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".