Disentangling detrimental sand fly-mite interactions in a closed laboratory sand fly colony: implications for vector-borne disease studies and guidelines for overcoming severe mite infestations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vector sand fly colonies are a critical component of studies aimed at improving the understanding of the neglected tropical disease leishmaniasis and alleviating its global impact. However, among laboratory-colonized arthropod vectors of infectious diseases, the labor-intensive nature of sand fly rearing coupled with the low number of colonies worldwide has generally discouraged the widespread use of sand flies in laboratory settings. Among the different factors associated with the low productivity of sand fly colonies, mite infestations are a significant factor. Sand fly colonies are prone to infestation by mites, and the physical interactions between sand flies and mites and metabolites have a negative impact on sand fly larval development. METHODS: Mites were collected from sand fly larval rearing pots and morphologically identified using taxonomic keys. Upon identification, they were photographed with a scanning electron microscope. Several mite control measures were adopted in two different laboratories, one at the Laboratory of Malaria and Vector Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases-National Institutes of Health (Rockville, MD, USA), and the other at the University of Calgary (Calgary, AB, Canada). RESULTS: The mite species associated with sand fly colonies in the two laboratories were morphologically identified as Tyrophagus sp. and Stratiolaelaps scimitus. While complete eradication of mites in sand fly colonies is considered unrealistic, drastically reducing their population has been associated with higher sand fly productivity. CONCLUSIONS: We report a case of detrimental interaction between sand flies and Tyrophagus sp. and S. scimitus in a closed laboratory sand fly colony, discuss their impact on sand fly production and provide guidelines for limiting the mite population size in a closed laboratory colony leading to improved sand fly yields.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".