Richness and diversity of helminth communities in tropical freshwater fishes: empirical evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim Published information on the richness and diversity of helminth parasite communities in tropical freshwater fishes is reviewed in response to expectations of species‐rich parasite communities in tropical regions. Location Areas covered include the tropics and some subtropical areas. In addition, the north temperate area of the nearctic zone is included for comparison. Methods Data from 159 communities in 118 species of tropical freshwater fish, summarized from 46 published studies, were used for this review. Parasite community descriptors used in the analyses included component community richness and calculated mean species richness. Data from 130 communities in 47 species of nearctic north temperate freshwater fish were summarized from 31 studies and used for comparison. Results The component helminth communities of many tropical freshwater fish are species‐poor, and considerable proportions of fish from certain parts of the tropics, e.g. West African drainages, are uninfected or lightly infected. Mean helminth species richness was low and equaled or exceeded 2.0 in only 22 of 114 communities. No single group of helminths was identified as a dominant component of the fauna and species composition was variable among and within broader geographical areas. The richest enteric helminth assemblages were found in mochokid and clariid catfish with a mixed carnivorous diet, whereas algal feeders, herbivores and detritivores generally had species‐poor gut helminth communities. Comparisons indicated that certain areas in the north temperate region had higher helminth species richness in fishes than areas in the tropics. Main conclusions Expectations of high species richness in helminth communities of tropical freshwater fishes are not fulfilled by the data. Direct comparisons of infracommunities and component communities in host species across widely separated phylogenetic and geographical lines are inappropriate. Examination of latitudinal differences in richness of monophyletic parasite groups or of compound communities may uncover patterns different from those found in this study. Richness of helminth communities may be ultimately determined not by the number of host species present but by the degree of divergence of host lineages and by their diversification modes. A phylogenetic framework for hosts and parasites will reveal if increased host species richness within host clades, when host speciation is accompanied by habitat or diet specialization, or both, leads to lower helminth diversity in host species by fragmentation of a core helminth fauna characteristic or specific of the larger host clade. This pattern may be analysed in the context of cospeciation and acquisition from other unrelated hosts (host‐sharing or host‐switching).
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".