Larval exposure to predator cues alters immune function and response to a fungal pathogen in post‐metamorphic wood frogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the past several decades, amphibian populations have been decreasing around the globe at an unprecedented rate. Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), the fungal pathogen that causes chytridiomycosis in amphibians, is contributing to amphibian declines. Natural and anthropogenic environmental factors are hypothesized to contribute to these declines by reducing the immunocompetence of amphibian hosts, making them more susceptible to infection. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) produced in the granular glands of a frog's skin are thought to be a key defense against Bd infection. These peptides may be a critical immune defense during metamorphosis because many acquired immune functions are suppressed during this time. To test if stressors alter AMP production and survival of frogs exposed to Bd, we exposed wood frog (Lithobates sylvaticus) tadpoles to the presence or absence of dragonfly predator cues crossed with a single exposure to three nominal concentrations of the insecticide malathion (0, 10, or 100 parts per billion [ppb]). We then exposed a subset of post-metamorphic frogs to the presence or absence of Bd zoospores and measured frog survival. Although predator cues and malathion had no effect on survival or size at metamorphosis, predator cues increased the time to metamorphosis by 1.5 days and caused a trend of a 20% decrease in hydrophobic skin peptides. Despite this decrease in peptides determined shortly after metamorphosis, previous exposure to predator cues increased survival in both Bd-exposed and unexposed frogs several weeks after metamorphosis. These results suggest that exposing tadpoles to predator cues confers fitness benefits later in life.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".