The phoretic mite (Arachnida: Acari) assemblage of the Douglas-fir beetle, <i>Dendroctonus pseudotsugae</i> Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The phoretic mite assemblage of the Douglas-fir beetle, Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) has not been as thoroughly documented as that of some other ecologically and economically important bark beetle species. Phoretic mites can impact individual fitness and population dynamics of their hosts and documenting the mite assemblage associated with a bark beetle may provide information on their ecological and interactive roles. We caught Douglas-fir beetles over two summers in central British Columbia, Canada and sorted the associated mites into morphospecies. Representatives of the morphospecies were DNA barcoded (cytochrome oxidate I barcode region) which indicated at least nine distinct Operational Taxonomic Units (OTUs). There was a mean of 50.5 ± 4.7 mites per beetle with both females and males carrying similar numbers of most mite species. However one OTU (Sarcoptiformes: Hemisarcoptidae) was found in substantially higher numbers than all other OTUs, and was always clustered in large aggregations in an anterior pocket on the sub-elytral surface. When B1 was removed from the mean, there were only 1.3 ± 0.2 mites per beetle. The consistent high numbers of that OTU in conjunction with its consistent anatomical aggregation suggests an important interaction between that mite species and the Douglas-fir beetle.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".