Bibliographic record
Abstract
Article Details: Received: 2019-09-09 | Accepted: 2019-11-12 | Available online: 2019-12-31 https://doi.org/10.15414/afz.2019.22.04.110-113 The faunistic research of dragonflies was realized during 2016 and 2017. The research was carried out under the conditions of Botanical gardenâs pond of Slovak University of Agriculture (SUA) in Nitra. 229 dragonfly individuals (105â, 124â) were trapped during the monitored period. Trapped individuals represented 10 species and 3 families of dragonflies. The aim of the research was to determine the species composition of dragonflies of the selected locality. Based on the representation of individual species for the monitored locality, its dominance was also calculated. Keywords: dragonflies, Odonata, bioindicator, habitat, pond, dominance, climate change  References ASKEW, R. R. (1988) The dragonflies of Europe. Colchester: Harley Books. 291 p. BERACKO, P. et al. (2017) Bentic invertebrates and its habitats. Bratislava: Faculty of Natural Sciences of Commenius university, 291 p. (in Slovak). BUTLER, R. G. and DE MAYNADIER, P. G. (2008) The significance of littoral and shoreline habitat integrity to the conservation of lacustrine damselflies (Odonata). In Journal of Insect Conservation, vol. 12, pp. 23â36. CORBET, P. S. (1999) Dragonflies: behavior and ecology of Odonata. New York: Cornell University Press, 829 p. DALECKÃ, V. (2011) Influence of landscape structure on bionomics of forest species of reophilic dragonflies. Bachelor thesis. Brno: Mendel University. 63 p. (in Czech). DAVID, S. (2013) Annotated Checklist of dragonflies (Odonata), Slovakia. In BRYJA, J. (eds.): Zoological days. Brno 2013: Abstracts from the conference. Brno: Mendel University, pp. 1â52. DAVID, S. and ÃBELOVÃ, M. (2015) Dragonflies (Odonata) of the Protected Area MlyÅany Arboretum. In Folia faunistica Slovaca, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 135â139. DIJKSTRA, K. D. B. and LEWINGTON, R. (2006) Field guide to the dragonflies of Britain and Europe including western Turkey and north-western Africa. London: British Wildlife Publishing, 320 p. FAÅ KO, P. and ŠŤASTNÃ, P. (2002) Average annual rainfall. In ZaÅ¥ko, M. (eds.) Initial landscape structure. Atlas of the Slovak Republic. Banská Bystrica: Ministry of the Environment of Slovak Republic, Slovak Agency of Environment, 344 p. (in Slovak). FOOTE, A. L. and HORNUNG, C. L. R. (2005) Odonates as biological indicators of grazing effects on Canadian prairie wetlands. In Ecological Entomology, vol. 30, pp. 273â283. HANEL, L. and ZELENÃ, J. (2000) Dragonflies (Odonata): research and protection. VlaÅ¡im: Czech Union for Nature Conservation, 240 p. (in Czech). HARABIÅ , F. and DOLNÃ, A. (2010) Ecological factors determining the density-distribution of Central European dragonflies (Odonata). In European Journal of Entomology, vol. 107, pp. 571â577. HEIDEMANN, H. and SEIDENBUSCH, R. (1993) Die Libellenlarven Deutschlands und Frankreichs. Handbuch für Exuviensammler. Keltern: Verlag Erna Bauer Keltern, 391 p. HOLUÅ A, O. and VANÄK, J. (2008) Fauna of Dragonfies (Odonata) KrkonoÅ¡. In Opera Corcontica, vol. 45, pp. 81â98 (in Czech). HOLUÅ A, O. (2013) Taxonomy, ecology and zoogeography of Cordulegaster dragonflies (Odonata: Corgulegastridae) in Central Europe. Dissertation thesis. Bratislava: Commenius University, 179 p. (in Slovak). HREÅ KO, J. et al. (2006) Nitra and its surroundings â Initial phase of research. Scientific Monograph. Nitra: Constantine the Philosopher University, 182 p. (in Slovak). KOHL, S. (1998) Odonata. Anisoptera â Exuvien (Grosslibellen-Larvenhäute) Europas. Bestimmungsschlüssel. Berlin: Kohl. 27 p. LAMBECK, R. J. (1997) Focal species: A multispecies umbrella for nature conservation. In Conservation Biology. vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 849â856. LOSOS, B. (1992) Exercise of animal ecology. Brno: Masaryk University, 229 p. NOSS, R.F. (1990) Indicators of monitoring biodiversity: A hierarchical approach. In Conservation Biology, vol. 4, pp. 355â364. OLBERG, R.M. et al. (2000) Prey Pursuit and Inception in Dragonflies. In Journal of Comparitive Physiology A: Sensory Neural and Behavioral physiology, vol. 186, pp. 155â162. SAHLÃN, G. and EKESTUBBE, K. (2001) Identification of dragonflies (Odonata) as indicators of general species richness in boreal forest lakes. In Biodiversity and Conservation, vol. 10, pp. 673â690. Å ÃCHA, D. et al. (2007) Dragonflies of Slovak Republic. [Online]. Retrieved 2019-03-20 from http://www.vazky.sk, 10/2008 (in Slovak). Å ÃCHA, D. et al. (2008) The key to identifying our species of dragonflies. [Online]. Retrieved 2019-05-12 from http://www. vazky.sk (in Slovak). Å ÃCHA, D. 2010. Dragonflies (Odonata) detected during âMonitoring of species of European importanceâ in southern Slovakia. In Folia faunistica Slovaca, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 43â46 (in Slovak). SIMAIKA, P. and SAMWAYS, M. J. (2008) Valuing dragonflies as service providers. In Córdoba-Aguilar A. (eds.): Dragonflies: Model Organisms for Ecological and Evolutionary Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23â55. TISCHLER, W. (1949) Basic features of terrestrial animal ecology. Wiesbaden: Springer trade media, 220 p. (in German). WASSCHER, M. T. and BOS, F. G. (2000) The European dragonflies: notes on the checklist and on species diversity. In Odonatologica, vol. 29, pp. 31â43. WILDERMUTH, H. (2001) The rotation model for the care of small bog waters. In Conservation and Landscape Planning, vol. 33, pp. 269â273 (in German). Â
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".