MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410998685 · doi:10.1029/2024ef005629

Increasing Mosquito Abundance Under Global Warming

2025· article· en· W4410998685 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. Achuthan Nair, Hong‐Yi Li, Jon Schwenk, Kaitlyn Martinez, Carrie A. Manore, Chonggang Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth s Future · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Vectors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryLaboratory Directed Research and Development
KeywordsAbundance (ecology)Environmental scienceGlobal warmingClimate changeClimatologyEcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mosquitoes are a key virus vector that poses significant health threats globally, affecting 700 million individuals and causing 1 million deaths annually. Accurately predicting mosquito abundance and dispersion remains a challenge. Complex interactions between mosquito dynamics and various environmental factors, notably hydrology, contribute to this challenge. Existing models typically focus on precipitation and temperature and often overlook further impacts of hydrological variables within mosquito modeling. In this study, we developed an artificial intelligence‐based model for mosquito dynamics, explicitly accounting for different hydrological variables, such as precipitation, soil moisture and streamflow. Using Toronto, Canada, as a case study, we identified causal relationships between changes in mosquito populations, hydrological factors, vegetation (e.g., leaf area index), and climate variables (e.g., daylight length, precipitation, and temperature). We embedded these relationships into a Long Short‐Term Memory (LSTM) Neural Network Model capable of accurately detecting mosquito dynamics across annual, seasonal, and monthly time scales. The LSTM is able to explain, on average, approximately 40% of the variance in the observed mosquito abundance data. Using the calibrated model, we predicted that the summer season mosquito abundance would increase by ∼16% and ∼19% under an intermediate greenhouse emission scenario, Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) 2–4.5, and a high greenhouse emission scenario, SSP5‐8.5, respectively. We expect that this model can serve as a valuable tool and inform science‐based decisions affecting mosquito dynamics and public health. It can also build a foundation for future risk analysis at the regional and larger scales.

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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth s FutureSame topicViral Infections and VectorsFrench-language works237,207