Abundance and maturity of three species of parasitic anisakine nematodes (<i>Pseudoterranova decipiens</i>, <i>Contracaecum osculatum</i>, <i>Anisakis simplex</i>) occurring in Sable Island harbour seals (<i>Phoca vitulina</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three species of anisakine nematodes (Pseudoterranova decipiens, Contracaecum osculatum, Anisakis simplex) co-occur in the stomachs of Sable Island harbour seals (Phoca vitulina). The sealworm, P. decipiens, was the commonest nematode in these seals. Anisakis simplex was found in much smaller numbers, none mature, indicating that the harbour seal is not a true final host to this parasite. Contracaecum osculatum was rare but half were mature. Pseudoterranova decipiens increased in abundance with size of the seal. An inverse relationship was observed between P. decipiens abundance and the age of seals of similar size, probably owing to changes in diet. Numbers of P. decipiens may have declined over the summer, coincident with an increase in the proportion of mature worms in the stomach. From similarities between the worm infections of grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) and harbour seals, we infer that A. simplex abundance may also exhibit a decline in abundance. Contracaecum osculatum was only encountered during the latter half of the year, suggesting an association with prey species of corresponding periodicity in their distribution. We estimate that the abundance of sealworm in harbour seals is about 2.5% of that carried by the grey seal population. This could imply that harbour seals represent an insignificant vector of the sealworm infecting commercial fish species in the Northwest Atlantic, provided density-dependent relationships exist between worm abundances in different host species.
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 | 0.001 | 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".