A Novel Model of Pathogenesis of Metarhizium anisopliae Propagules through the Midguts of Aedes aegypti Larvae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We assessed the effect of the entomopathogenic fungus Metarhizium anisopliae against Aedes aegypti. Conidia of M. anisopliae strains CG 489, CG 153, and IBCB 481 were grown in Adamek medium under different conditions to improve blastospore production. Mosquito larvae were exposed to blastospores or conidia of the three fungal strains at 1 × 107 propagules mL−1. M. anisopliae IBCB 481 and CG 153 reduced larval survival by 100%, whereas CG 489 decreased survival by about 50%. Blastospores of M. anisopliae IBCB 481 had better results in lowering larval survival. M. anisopliae CG 489 and CG 153 reduced larval survival similarly. For histopathology (HP) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), larvae were exposed to M. anisopliae CG 153 for 24 h or 48 h. SEM confirmed the presence of fungi in the digestive tract, while HP confirmed that propagules reached the hemocoel via the midgut, damaged the peritrophic matrix, caused rupture and atrophy of the intestinal mucosa, caused cytoplasmic disorganization of the enterocytes, and degraded the brush border. Furthermore, we report for the first time the potential of M. anisopliae IBCB 481 to kill Ae. aegypti larvae and methods to improve the production of blastospores.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".