CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Cuterebra

genus of insects

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMar 22, 2026
Entity authorityQ14698598 ↗
Source-derived summary

Cuterebra, or rodent bots, is a genus of bot flies that attack rodents and similar animals.

Etymology

The genus name Cuterebra is a blend of the Latin words cutis 'skin' and terebra 'borer' with apparent shortening of expected Cutiterebra to Cuterebra.

Species

These 78 species belong to the genus Cuterebra:

Data sources: i = ITIS, c = Catalogue of Life, g = GBIF, b = Bugguide.net

See also

Cuterebriasis

References

External links

"Cuterebra". The Encyclopedia of Life.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Cuterebra” is genus of insects. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Cuterebra, genus and insects, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current 77-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Cuterebra, genus and insects is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “genus of insects” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q14698598. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Cuterebra”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Cuterebra primary sources, Cuterebra archive and Cuterebra research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cuterebra”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Cuterebra” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.