Cascading effects of habitat loss on ectoparasite-associated bacterial microbiomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Suitable habitat fragment size, isolation, and distance from a source are important variables influencing community composition of plants and animals, but the role of these environmental factors in determining composition and variation of host-associated microbial communities is poorly known. In parasite-associated microbial communities, it is hypothesized that evolution and ecology of an arthropod parasite will influence its microbiome more than broader environmental factors, but this hypothesis has not been extensively tested. To examine the influence of the broader environment on the parasite microbiome, we applied high-throughput sequencing of the V4 region of 16S rRNA to characterize the microbiome of 222 obligate ectoparasitic bat flies (Streblidae and Nycteribiidae) collected from 155 bats (representing six species) from ten habitat fragments in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Parasite species identity is the strongest driver of microbiome composition. To a lesser extent, reduction in habitat fragment area, but not isolation, is associated with an increase in connectance and betweenness centrality of bacterial association networks driven by changes in the diversity of the parasite community. Controlling for the parasite community, bacterial network topology covaries with habitat patch area and exhibits parasite-species specific responses to environmental change. Taken together, habitat loss may have cascading consequences for communities of interacting macro- and microorgansims.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".