Platyhelminth parasite reproduction: some general principles derived from monogeneans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the importance of reproduction in platyhelminth parasite biology, there is generally only sketchy information on key parameters; many studies lack documentation on variation and there is limited application of laboratory studies to natural events. This review focuses on case studies involving monogeneans (species of the genera Polystoma, Protopolystoma, Pseudodiplorchis, Discocotyle, and Gyrodactylus) where laboratory experimental data are linked with fieldwork to produce exact measurements of life-history traits. Data are characterized by wide variation and sensitivity to limiting factors. In contrasting patterns of reproductive biology, controls are imposed by the external environment and by density, but there is consistent evidence of powerful regulation by host factors; most reproductive parameters, including prepatent period, egg production rate, and life-span, are negatively affected. Alongside rate-limiting effects, host factors operating during prereproductive development inflict massive mortality; this strongly regulates the size of the adult parasite population contributing to future recruitment. High fecundity is traditionally viewed as compensating for losses that occur as a result of the hazards of transmission, but this review suggests that parasite reproductive adaptations have their most significant role in countering the additional losses that occur post invasion. Regulation of parasite reproductive potential by host immunity and the reproductive specializations that counter this constraint represent a distinguishing characteristic of parasitism.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".