The Role of Bacterial Symbionts in Triatomines: An Evolutionary Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insects have established mutualistic symbiotic interactions with microorganisms that are beneficial to both host and symbiont. Many insects have exploited these symbioses to diversify and expand their ecological ranges. In the Hemiptera (i.e., aphids, cicadas, and true bugs), symbioses have established and evolved with obligatory essential microorganisms (primary symbionts) and with facultative beneficial symbionts (secondary symbionts). Primary symbionts are usually intracellular microorganisms found in insects with specialized diets such as obligate hematophagy or phytophagy. Most Heteroptera (true bugs), however, have gastrointestinal (GI) tract extracellular symbionts with functions analogous to primary endosymbionts. The triatomines, are vectors of the human parasite, Trypanosoma cruzi. A description of their small GI tract microbiota richness was based on a few culturable microorganisms first described almost a century ago. A growing literature describes more complex interactions between triatomines and bacteria with properties characteristic of both primary and secondary symbionts. In this review, we provide an evolutionary perspective of beneficial symbioses in the Hemiptera, illustrating the context that may drive the evolution of symbioses in triatomines. We highlight the diversity of the triatomine microbiota, bacterial taxa with potential to be beneficial symbionts, the unique characteristics of triatomine-bacteria symbioses, and the interactions among trypanosomes, microbiota, and triatomines.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".