FIRST CANADIAN RECORD OF THE ZOOPHILIC FRUIT FLY PHORTICA VARIEGATA (FALLÉN) (DIPTERA: DROSOPHILIDAE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The large cosmopolitan family Drosophilidae (Diptera) (vinegar flies) contains over 4,000 species and is very well-known for its extensive use in biological research.The family is divided into two subfamilies, Drosophilinae (43 genera) and Steganinae (28 genera), in addition to two genera incertae sedis within Drosophilidae (Brake and Bächli 2008).Within the subfamily Steganinae, nine genera have been recorded in the Nearctic Region, five of which are found in Canada (Brake and Bächli 2008).Feeding habits of the Steganinae are highly diverse, with the ecology of many genera much less known than those in Drosophilinae, which typically feed on plant materials or fungi (Baechli et al. 2004). PhorticaSchiner in the subfamily Steganinae is composed of over 97 species found largely in the Oriental and Palearctic regions (Brake and Bächli 2008; Cheng et al. 2008).Prior to 2014, four species of Phortica had been reported in the Nearctic Region: P. albavictoria (Patterson & Mainland) from Mexico, P. huachucae (Wheeler) from Arizona, P. picta (Coquillett) from Mexico to Nevada, and P. polychaeta (Wheeler) from northern Mexico and the southwestern United States.All four species are native to the Nearctic Region (Brake and Bächli 2008; D. Grimaldi, American Museum of Natural History, pers.comm., March 7, 2018).In 2014, P. variegata (Fallén) (Figs.1A-D), the zoophilic fruit fly, was discovered in Orange County, New York State by D. Grimaldi; the following year, this introduced species was reported from Monroe County, New York State (Werner and Jaenike 2017; Grimaldi 2018).Images posted on the online resource BugGuide (https://bugguide. net) from Middlesex County, Massachusetts (Murray 2011) and identified as P. variegata date back to 2011.Therefore, the introduction of this species into the United States was at least as early as 2011.Phortica variegata is native to the Palearctic Region and, as its common name suggests, males of the zoophilic fruit fly are attracted to lachrymal secretions of humans and other animals (Otranto et al. 2006a).The biology of this species is little known; however,
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".