Identification of nectar sources foraged by female mosquitoes in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For many mosquito species, the females must obtain vertebrate blood to complete a gonotrophic cycle. These blood meals are frequently supplemented by feeding on sugary plant nectar, which sustains energy reserves needed for flight, mating, and overall fitness. Our understanding of mosquito nectar foraging behaviors is mostly limited to laboratory experiments and direct field observations, with little research into natural mosquito-host plant relationships done in North America. In this study, we collected nectar-fed female mosquitoes over a 2-year period in Manitoba, Canada, and amplified a fragment of the chloroplast rbcL gene to identify the plant species fed upon. We found that mosquitoes foraged from diverse plant families (e.g., grasses, trees, ornamentals, and legumes), but preferred certain species, most notably soybean and Kentucky blue grass. Moreover, there appeared to be some associations between plant feeding preferences and mosquito species, date of collection, landscape, and geographical region. Overall, this study implemented DNA barcoding to identify nectar sources forage by mosquitoes in the Canadian Prairies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".