MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981364353 · doi:10.1080/14888386.2019.1663636

In defence of the world’s most reviled invertebrate ‘bugs’

2019· article· en· W2981364353 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityInvertebrateBiologyEcologyWildlifeDozenDasypus novemcinctus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Species of invertebrate animals, notably insects, are undergoing an alarmingly high rate of extinction, coupled with minimal support for their protection, even from the world’s leading conservation organisations. This is intolerable, as invertebrates constitute over 95% of the world’s species, have indispensable economic values and provide ecological services without which life on earth would virtually cease. Much of the lack of public and governmental support for invertebrate conservation is due to the abhorrent tiny pests that have persuaded most people that ‘bugs’ are bad and consequently the only species worthy of support are the charismatic superstar mammals like pandas and tigers that currently are the mainstays of biodiversity fundraising. Just as these respected, highly attractive icons are effective ambassadors of biodiversity conservation, so certain detested pests have poisoned the public image of invertebrates, and indeed have made it seem to many that most wildlife is hostile. The ‘dirty dozen’ bugs that particularly are a hindrance to improving public investment in biodiversity are: bedbugs, clothes moths, cockroaches, fleas, houseflies, leeches, lice, locusts, mosquitoes, spiders, termites and ticks. Except for spiders, these species, admittedly, are responsible for enormous damage to health and economic welfare. Nevertheless, this paper shows that most have at least some compensating values, their harm has often been exaggerated and all have related species that are good citizens. Six of the dozen ‘least wanted’ invertebrates highlighted are blood parasites of humans, and these ‘bad apples’ are very hard to defend since parasitism seems abhorrent. Remarkably, however, at least half of the world’s tens of millions of species are also parasites, and without them most ecosystems would be in danger of collapse. To improve invertebrate conservation, it is advisable that efforts be made to educate the public regarding their importance. Since prejudices against ‘bugs’ are primarily acquired during childhood, special attention is needed to persuade the young that most invertebrates are harmless, valuable and entertaining. Recent advances in genetic engineering (‘synthetic biology’, ‘genetic drives’) have led to very serious consideration of deliberately eliminating the world’s worst pests of humans. While these extermination technologies could greatly increase support for invertebrate conservation by annihilating their most despised representatives, the dangers of unforeseen damage to ecosystems and hence to biodiversity are substantial.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.231 · 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