Woodchip borders at the forest ecotone as an environmental control measure to reduce questing tick density along recreational trails in Ottawa, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies have highlighted the occurrence and distribution of Ixodes scapularis ticks infected with Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto (s.s.) around the city of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, and the need for strategies to mitigate the risk of human exposure and infection. We conducted a field study from July to October 2018 to examine the effectiveness of ecotonal woodchip borders as an environmental control method to suppress the density of host-seeking ticks along recreational trails in Ottawa. We used an experimental design with ten 100-m trail replicates randomized to intervention or control groups, and monitored questing tick density at weekly intervals in mid-summer and early fall. We compared questing tick density between woodchip-treated and untreated trails using a mixed-effects Poisson regression model. Of the 138 I. scapularis ticks collected, there were 86 adult and nymphal ticks, 37 (43 %) of which were positive for B. burgdorferi s.s. A total of 58 Haemaphysalis leporispalustris were also collected. Mean combined adult and nymphal I. scapularis density was 1.15 (1.40 standard deviation; SD) per 100 m in the control group compared to 0.28 (0.56 SD) per 100 m in the intervention group, reflecting a 75 % reduction in questing tick density on trail replicates treated with woodchip borders (p < 0.001). An effect of the intervention was observed in both sampling periods. This study indicates that woodchip borders may be an effective strategy to suppress questing tick density along trail margins where recreational trail users are more active, thereby reducing the likelihood of tick encounters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".