MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dragonflies (Odonata) of Botanical Garden‘s Pond of SUA in Nitra

2019· article· en· W2996561073 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mária Babošová

Bibliographic record

VenueActa fytotechnica et zootechnica/Acta fytotechnica et zootechnica · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOdonataAnisopteraEcologyHabitatGeographyDragonflyLibellulidaeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 garden‘s pond of Slovak University of Agriculture (SUA) in Nitra. 229 dragonfly individuals (105♂, 124♀) 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. 23–36. CORBET, P. S. (1999) Dragonflies: behavior and ecology of Odonata. New York: Cornell University Press, 829 p. DALECKÝ, 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. 1–52. DAVID, S. and ÁBELOVÁ, M. (2015) Dragonflies (Odonata) of the Protected Area Mlyňany Arboretum. In Folia faunistica Slovaca, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 135–139. 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 ŠŤASTNÝ, 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. 273–283. HANEL, L. and ZELENÝ, J. (2000) Dragonflies (Odonata): research and protection. VlaÅ¡im: Czech Union for Nature Conservation, 240 p. (in Czech). HARABIÅ , F. and DOLNÝ, A. (2010) Ecological factors determining the density-distribution of Central European dragonflies (Odonata). In European Journal of Entomology, vol. 107, pp. 571–577. 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 VANĚK, J. (2008) Fauna of Dragonfies (Odonata) KrkonoÅ¡. In Opera Corcontica, vol. 45, pp. 81–98 (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 – Initial phase of research. Scientific Monograph. Nitra: Constantine the Philosopher University, 182 p. (in Slovak). KOHL, S. (1998) Odonata. Anisoptera – 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. 849–856. 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. 355–364. 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. 155–162. SAHLÉN, 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. 673–690. ŠÁCHA, D. et al. (2007) Dragonflies of Slovak Republic. [Online]. Retrieved 2019-03-20 from http://www.vazky.sk, 10/2008 (in Slovak). ŠÁCHA, D. et al. (2008) The key to identifying our species of dragonflies. [Online]. Retrieved 2019-05-12 from http://www. vazky.sk (in Slovak). ŠÁCHA, D. 2010. Dragonflies (Odonata) detected during „Monitoring of species of European importance“ in southern Slovakia. In Folia faunistica Slovaca, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 43–46 (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. 23–55. 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. 31–43. WILDERMUTH, H. (2001) The rotation model for the care of small bog waters. In Conservation and Landscape Planning, vol. 33, pp. 269–273 (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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa fytotechnica et zootechnica/Acta fytotechnica et zootechnicaSame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207