Effects of relative humidity on egg hatching success of blow flies (Diptera: Calliphoridae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humidity can influence oviposition decisions by females and the development and survival of offspring. We measured the impact of relative humidity on egg eclosion of three forensically relevant blow fly species: Lucilia sericata (Meigen), Phormia regina (Meigen) and Calliphora vicina Robineau-Desvoidy (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Egg masses were placed into glass jars lined with filter paper and placed into growth chambers at 25°C with 12:12 L:D, across six levels of relative humidity (30, 40, 50, 60, 70, and 80%). Eggs were observed every six hours for eclosing larvae to measure the effect of humidity on time to egg eclosion. As relative humidity increased, time to eclosion decreased for all three species. Calliphora vicina hatching success was the least affected by humidity, maintaining greater than 60% hatching success even at 30% relative humidity. In contrast, L. sericata required at least 50% relative humidity to have hatching success above 60%. Phormia regina was the most affected by humidity, requiring relative humidity to be above 70% to reach hatching success above 60%. Given the differential effect of relative humidity on egg hatching, these results may have implications for oviposition decisions made by female blow flies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".