Bibliographic record
Abstract
Florida, USA. Colonies were maintained in plastic boxes with glass test tubes filled with water constrained by cotton wool, and were fed a combination of mealworms, cockroaches, crickets, sunflower seed, and Bhatkar-Whitcomb diet (31). All colonies were maintained at 27 °C, 70 % humidity, and 12 hour day:night cycle. Isolation of sal homologues. We isolated fragments of sal from P. morrisi (1), as well as from P. obtusospinosa and P. rhea using PCR on cDNA that was generated from reverse transcription of their larval mRNA. We cloned and sequenced these fragments to confirm their identity, and performed gene tree analyses to confirm their orthology with Nasonia, Apis, and Drosophila sal. PCR primers and conditions are described in (1). GenBank accession numbers are JN205075 for P. obtusospinosa sal and JN205076 for P. rhea sal. Whole mount in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. We fixed and processed last instar larvae just prior to the prepupal stage (32). We carefully dissected larvae under a Zeiss Discovery V12 stereomicroscope to remove obstructive tissues surrounding imaginal discs. We then synthesized a digoxigenin-labelled riboprobe (Roche Diagnostics Canada) for P. morrisi sal (33). We used this P. morrisi sal probe for all in situ
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.763 | 0.383 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".