MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041419921 · doi:10.1017/s0031182014001826

Impact of the cestode<i>Triaenophorus nodulosus</i>on the exotic<i>Lepomis gibbosus</i>and the autochthonous<i>Perca fluviatilis</i>

2014· article· en· W2041419921 on OpenAlexaff
G. Masson, Marie Vanacker, Michael G. Fox, Jean‐Nicolas Beisel

Bibliographic record

VenueParasitology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerchLepomisEsoxPikeBiologyParasite hostingFisheryAquatic animalEcologyZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of plerocercoids of the cestode Triaenophorus nodulosus infecting the livers of native Eurasian perch Perca fluviatilis and non-native pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus was investigated in 17 sites along the Moselle watershed. With a single exception, infected individuals were not observed in the main channel whether or not northern pike Esox lucius, a final host, was present. In ponds where the pike was present, the prevalence of T. nodulosus averaged 86% in Eurasian perch and 15% in pumpkinseed. The parasite was not present at all in ponds when pike were absent. Parasite load, hepatosomatic index (HSI), gonadosomatic index (GSI) and body condition index (CI) were compared between hosts in one site where parasite prevalence and fish abundance was highest. HSI in infected perch was significantly higher than in uninfected perch, whereas no differences in HSI were detected between infected and uninfected pumpkinseed. While perch were more frequently infected and had a greater average parasite load than pumpkinseed, there were no significant differences in either indicator between the two species. Furthermore, no significant differences in GSI or CI were observed between infected and uninfected fish in either species, by either gender or maturity stage. We hypothesize that pumpkinseed is more resistant to the parasite or less likely to feed upon infected copepods than perch.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParasitologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207