MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403586698 · doi:10.3390/insects15100822

Modelling Blow Fly (Diptera: Calliphoridae) Spatiotemporal Species Richness and Total Abundance Across Land-Use Types

2024· article· en· W4403586698 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Madison A. Laprise, Alice Grgicak‐Mannion, Sherah L. VanLaerhoven

Bibliographic record

VenueInsects · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsSpecies richnessAbundance (ecology)EcologyDistance decayHabitatBiologySTREAMSEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geographic Information Systems provide the means to explore the spatial distribution of insect species across various land-use types to understand their relationship with shared or overlapping spatiotemporal resources. Blow fly species richness and total fly abundance were correlated among six land-use types (residential, commercial, waste, woods, roads, and agricultural crop types) and distance to streams. To generate multivariate models of species richness and total fly abundance, blow fly trapping sites were chosen across the land-use gradient of Windsor-Essex County (Ontario, Canada) using a stratified random sampling approach. Sampling occurred in mid-June (spring), late August (summer), and late October (fall). Spring species richness correlated highest to residential (-), woods (-), distance to streams (+), and tomato fields (+) in models across all three land-use buffer scale distances (0.5, 1, 2 km), with waste (+/-), roads (-), wheat/corn (-), and commercial (-) correlating at only two of the three scales. Spring total fly abundance correlated with all but one land-use variable across all buffer scale distances, but the distance to streams (+), followed by orchards/vineyards (+) exhibited the greatest importance to these models. Summer blow fly species richness correlated with roads (-) and commercial (+) across all buffer distances, whereas at two of three buffer distances wheat/corn (-), residential (+), distance to streams (+), waste (-), and orchards/vineyards (+) were also important. Summer total fly abundance correlated to models with distance to streams (+), orchards/vineyards (+), and sugar beets/other vegetables (+) at the 2 km scale. Species richness and total abundance models at the 0.5 km buffer distance exhibited the highest correlation, lowest root mean square error, and similar prediction error to those derived at larger buffer distances. This study provides baseline methods and models for future validation and expansion of species-specific knowledge regarding adult blow fly relationships with spatiotemporal resources across land-use types and landscape features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsectsSame topicForensic Entomology and Diptera StudiesFrench-language works237,207