MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030597972 · doi:10.1093/jisesa/ieaa035

Modeling the Putative Ancient Distribution of Aedes togoi (Diptera: Culicidae)

2020· article· en· W3030597972 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel A.H. Peach, Benjamin J. Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Insect Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsBiologyAedesDistribution (mathematics)ZoologyEvolutionary biologyEcologyLarva

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coastal rock pool mosquito, Aedes (Tanakius) togoi (Theobald) (Diptera: Culicidae), is found in coastal east Asia in climates ranging from subtropical to subarctic. However, a disjunct population in the Pacific Northwest of North America has an ambiguous heritage. Two potential models explain the presence of Ae. togoi in North America: ancient Beringian dispersal or modern anthropogenic introduction. Genetic studies have thus far proved inconclusive. Here we described the putative ancient distribution of Ae. togoi habitat in east Asia and examined the climatic feasibility of a Beringian introduction into North America using modern distribution records and ecological niche modeling of bioclimatic data from the last interglacial period (~120,000 BP), the last glacial maximum (~21,000 BP), and the mid-Holocene (~6000 BP). Our results suggest that suitable climatic conditions existed for Ae. togoi to arrive in North America through natural dispersal as well as to persist there until present times. Furthermore, we find that ancient distributions of suitable Ae. togoi habitat in east Asia may explain the genetic relationships between Ae. togoi populations identified in other studies. These findings indicate the utility of ecological niche modeling as a complementary tool for studying insect phylogeography.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.256 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Insect ScienceSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207