Patterns of trematode and nematode lungworm infections in northern leopard frogs and wood frogs from Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we examined trematode and nematode lung helminths commonly found in two species of host ranid frogs for competitive interactions. We examined 147 adult (breeding and non-breeding) and juvenile northern leopard frogs, and 84 breeding male wood frogs in Bishops Mills, Ontario for Haematoloechus spp. (Trematoda) and Rhabdias sp. (Nematoda) infections. A strong negative association between phyla of helminth was observed in breeding and juvenile northern leopard frogs, and also in breeding wood frogs, but not in non-breeding adult northern leopard frogs. Few hosts carried both types of worm concurrently. Thirteen northern leopard frogs carried dual infections, while 77 carried only one phylum of helminth. Twenty-seven wood frogs carried dual infections, while 54 carried only one phylum of helminth. We also observed spatial segregation of the two phyla in host lungs. Our study informs future research on the dynamics of interactions among lung helminths in these two 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".