MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080985735 · doi:10.1017/s0031182002001658

The trouble with sealworms (<i>Pseudoterranova decipiens</i> species complex, Nematoda): a review

2002· review· en· W2080985735 on OpenAlexaff
G. A. H. McClelland

Bibliographic record

VenueParasitology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGroundfishFish processingEuryhalineFisheryAbiotic componentMarine fishFishingBycatchZoologyParasite hostingEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Fisheries management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sealworms or codworms, larvae of ascaridoid nematodes belonging to the Pseudoterranova decipiens species complex, infect the flesh of numerous species of marine and euryhaline fish, and have proven a chronic and costly cosmetic problem for seafood processors. Moreover, the parasite may cause abdominal discomfort in humans when consumed in raw, undercooked or lightly marinated fish. In this review, the phylogeny, life cycle and distributions of sealworms are discussed along with biotic and abiotic factors which may influence distributions of these parasites in their intermediate and final hosts. Also considered here are efforts to control the problem through commercial fishing practices, fish processing technology, and the reduction of infection parameters in marine fish populations by biological means. Ironically, concern over sealworm problem has subsided in some fisheries in recent years, not as a result of falling infection parameters in fish stocks or innovations in processing technology, but as a consequence of declines in abundance and size of groundfish.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations128
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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