Impact of eutrophication on wood frog, <i>Rana sylvatica</i>, tadpoles infected with Echinostoma trivolvis cercariae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In freshwater systems, environmental changes, such as eutrophication, are occurring that could impact the outcome of host–parasite interactions. Using tadpole infection with trematode cercariae as a host–parasite system, this study examined (i) growth, development, and maintenance of trematode ( Echinostoma trivolvis (Cort, 1914)) infection levels in second intermediate host larval wood frogs ( Rana sylvatica LeConte, 1825) and (ii) post-infection impacts of eutrophication on R. sylvatica tadpoles infected to varying degrees with E. trivolvis cercariae. Results from the first experiment suggest no impact of infection with 50 cercariae on R. sylvatica growth and development compared with uninfected controls. Results from the second experiment, investigating the impact of eutrophication on infected tadpoles, showed that survival to metamorphosis of the individuals in the highest infection treatment (80 cercariae) was reduced regardless of eutrophication treatment. However, for individuals surviving infection with 80 cercariae and for individuals infected with only 20 cercariae, no impact of infection on mass at metamorphosis was documented, although individuals were larger at metamorphosis in the eutrophic tanks. These data demonstrate that infection with E. trivolvis can impact R. sylvatica survivorship, at least above some threshold infection level, and that eutrophication may have minimal impacts on tadpole hosts once infection has occurred.
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".