MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020760709 · doi:10.1139/cjz-78-6-1085

Cold hardiness in two helminth parasites of the freeze-tolerant wood frog, <i>Rana sylvatica</i>

2000· article· en· W2020760709 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Douglas C. Woodhams, Jon P. Costanzo, Jonathan D Kelty, Richard E. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyHardiness (plants)RanaAnatomyZoologyEcologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wood frogs, Rana sylvatica, tolerate the freezing of their body tissues as an overwintering adaptation. Various parasites infect wood frogs of northern populations, but nothing is known about their strategies for surviving within a frozen host. We examined winter-conditioned wood frogs that were experimentally exposed to 0°C (nonfrozen) or –4°C (frozen) to determine whether endoparasites survive the freezing of their host. We found no differences in the prevalence or intensity of adult lungworms Rhabdias ranae (Nematoda) or of larvae of an unidentified species of digenetic trematode between these groups. Live individuals of both species were observed in hosts that recovered from experimental freezing at –4°C. Within the host, R. ranae also tolerated exposure to –5°C, a temperature near the lower limit of survival of the wood frog. Cryostage experiments showed that, like its host, R. ranae was highly susceptible to inoculative freezing and tolerant of the freezing of its tissues. Rhabdias ranae frozen in v...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207