Generalists at the interface: Nematode transmission between wild and domestic ungulates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many parasitic nematode species are generalists capable of infecting multiple host species. The complex life cycle of nematodes, involving partial development outside of the host, facilitates transmission of these parasites between host species even when there is no direct contact between hosts. Infective nematode larvae persist in the environment, and where grazing or water sources are shared ingestion of parasite larvae deposited by different host species is likely. In this paper we examine the extent to which nematode parasite species have been observed in sympatric wild and domestic ungulates. First, using existing host-parasite databases, we describe expected overlap of 412 nematode species between 76 wild and 8 domestic ungulate host species. Our results indicate that host-specific parasites make up less than half of the nematode parasites infecting any particular ungulate host species. For wild host species, between 14% (for common warthog) and 76% (for mouflon) of parasitic nematode species are shared with domestic species. For domestic host species, between 42% (for horse) and 77% (for llamas/alpacas) of parasitic nematode species are shared with wild species. We also present an index of liability to describe the risk of cross-boundary parasites to each host species. We then examine specific examples from the literature in which transmission of nematode parasites between domestic and wild ungulates is described. However, there are many limitations in the existing data due to geographical bias and certain host species being studied more frequently than others. Although we demonstrate that many species of parasitic nematode are found in both wild and domestic hosts, little work has been done to demonstrate whether transmission is occurring between species or whether similar strains circulate separately. Additional research on cross-species transmission, including the use of models and of genetic methods to define strains, will provide evidence to answer this question.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".