Identification, Distribution, and Habitat Suitability Models of Ixodid Tick Species in Cattle in Eastern Bhutan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tick infestation is the most reported parasitological problem in cattle in Bhutan. In May and June 2019, we collected ticks from 240 cattle in two districts of Eastern Bhutan. Tick presence, diversity, and infestation prevalence were examined by morphological identification of 3600 live adult ticks. The relationships between cattle, geographic factors, and infestation prevalence were assessed using logistic regression analyses. Habitat suitability for the tick species identified was determined using MaxEnt. Four genera and six species of ticks were found. These were Rhipicephalus microplus (Canestrini) (70.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 68.7–71.7)), Rhipicephalus haemaphysaloides Supino (18.8% (95% CI: 17.5–20.1)), Haemaphysalis bispinosa Neumann (8.2% (95% CI: 7.3–9.1)), Haemaphysalis spinigera Neumann (2.5% (95% CI: 2–3)), Amblyomma testudinarium Koch (0.19% (95% CI: 0.07–0.4)), and a single unidentified Ixodes sp. Logistic regression indicated that the variables associated with infestation were: longitude and cattle age for R. microplus; latitude for R. haemaphysaloides; and altitude and cattle breed for H. bispinosa and H. spinigera. MaxEnt models showed land cover to be an important predictor for the occurrence of all tick species examined. These findings provide information that can be used to initiate and plan enhanced tick surveillance and subsequent prevention and control programs for ticks and tick-borne diseases in cattle in Bhutan.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".