Compensatory growth in threespine sticklebacks (<i>Gasterosteus aculeatus</i>) inhibited by experimental <i>Schistocephalus</i> infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compensatory growth responses are made by individual fish to restore their original growth trajectory following a period of growth depression. Little is known about whether diseases impact a fish's capacity for growth compensation. In this study we investigate the effect of Schistocephalus solidus, a common cestode parasite of threespine sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus), on the ability of host fish to undertake growth compensation following short-term food deprivation. Placebo-infected controls completely compensated for a 2-week deprivation period after 3 weeks postdeprivation feeding, but experimentally infected sticklebacks showed only partial compensation and after 6 weeks of refeeding had attained only 80% of the weight of continually fed infected fish. A major factor limiting the compensatory growth response of infected fish was their reduced hyperphagic response during the period of refeeding. Feed deprivation had no effect on ultimate parasite size of infected fish. We discuss the possible mechanisms limiting hyperphagia in infected fish and consider the fitness implications — for parasites and hosts — of the reduced ability of infected fish to undertake compensatory growth responses.
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) | 0.001 | 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".