Parasitism, mercury contamination, and stable isotopes in fish-eating double-crested cormorants: no support for the co-ingestion hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mercury and parasitism have been positively correlated in free-ranging birds. One proposed explanation is that mercury reduces host immunity, resulting in a greater susceptibility to parasitism. However, alternative explanations should be addressed to further inform and test hypotheses about relationships between mercury and parasitism. We investigated whether total mercury and Contracaecum spp. were correlated in double-crested cormorants ( Phalacrocorax auritus (Lesson, 1831)) and whether there was support for mercury and infective stages of parasites being co-ingested. For breeding cormorants, males had 1.5 times more total mercury in breast muscle than did females and >2 times more Contracaecum spp. in the proventriculus and stomach region. Males responsible for the sex biases in mercury concentration were not the same males responsible for sex biases in parasitism, hence separate explanations for these patterns were required. Males foraged in more pelagic areas and at a slightly lower trophic level than did females, as determined by stable C and N isotope signatures, respectively. These sex differences in foraging and expected differential consumption of intermediate fish hosts could explain the sex bias in parasitism but not the sex bias in mercury concentration. We suggest when testing contaminant–parasite linkages that sex differences in exposure be addressed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".