<i>Trichodina murmanica</i> (Ciliophora) and <i>Gyrodactylus pleuronecti</i> (Monogenea) parasitizing hatchery‐reared winter flounder, <i>Pseudopleuronectes americanus</i> (Walbaum): effects on host growth and assessment of parasite interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus, caught in Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick, Canada, and held captive under crowded conditions, developed mixed infections of Trichodina murmanica Polyanski, 1955 (Ciliophora) and Gyrodactylus pleuronecti Cone, 1981 (Monogenea). A protocol involving sequential sieving was used to separate the two species of parasites and produce viable experimental baths. Replicate groups of juvenile, hatchery‐reared flounder received one of the following treatments: mixed bath of G. pleuronecti and T. murmanica , bath of G. pleuronecti, bath of T. murmanica or parasite‐free (controls). The abundance of both parasites correlated negatively with condition factor of the flounder ( r =−0.354, P < 0.001 for Trichodina ; r =–0.205, P < 0.05 for Gyrodactylus ). During the periods of peak parasite abundance (1–2 weeks postinfection), the effect of the two parasite species was additive, as mean condition factor and the percentage change in weight were significantly lower (ANOVA, P < 0.05) among fish with mixed infections compared to single infections or controls. The most common signs of tissue pathology were increased density of epidermal mucous cells on the fins and macrovesicular lipidosis of the hepatocytes. After a significant decline in parasite infrapopulations (3 weeks postinfection), infected fish resumed normal growth, indicating the observed effects were somewhat reversible.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".