MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291567045 · doi:10.4039/tce.2022.27

Spatial distribution of chewing lice (Phthiraptera: Menoponidae, Philopteridae) infesting Canada geese and mallards (Aves: Anatidae), in Manitoba, Canada

2022· article· en· W4291567045 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra A. Grossi, Terry D. Galloway

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Entomologist · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBird parasitology and diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnatidaeAnseriformesAnasBiologyBrantaZoologyWaterfowlGooseEcologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Canada geese, Branta canadensis (Linnaeus) (Anseriformes: Anatidae), and mallards, Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus (Anseriformes: Anatidae), are infested by several species of chewing lice (Phthiraptera: Menoponidae, Philopteridae). We examined the spatial distribution of lice upon these hosts. Hosts were dissected into five body regions: head and neck, wings, back, underside, and tail. Canada geese ( n = 20) were infested with six species of lice. Anaticola anseris (Linnaeus) ( n = 423) and Anatoecus spp. ( n = 510) were restricted to the wings and head, respectively, whereas Ornithobius goniopleurus Denny ( n = 1919) and Ciconiphilus pectiniventris (Harrison) ( n = 757) were spread over multiple body regions. Trinoton anserinum (Fabricius) ( n = 2) was present in insufficient numbers to reach conclusions about its distribution. Mallards ( n = 8) were infested with four species of lice. Anaticola crassicornis (Scopoli) ( n = 121) and Anatoecus dentatus (Scopoli) ( n = 244) were restricted to the wings and head, respectively. Holomenopon maxbeieri Eichler ( n = 52) infested multiple body regions, and Trinoton querquedulae (Linnaeus) ( n = 27) were found mainly on the wings. Chewing lice infesting mallards and Canada geese partition their hosts in accordance with their own morphological and ecological requirements.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian EntomologistSame topicBird parasitology and diseasesFrench-language works237,207