MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2132411188 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2014-0093

Test of immunocompetence handicap hypothesis in mice (<i>Mus musculus</i>) infected with <i>Trichinella spiralis</i>

2014· article· en· W2132411188 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
T. Zhang, Hongxuan He

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsImmunocompetenceBiologyTestosterone (patch)Trichinella spiralisImmune systemCorticosteroneParasite hostingHouse miceTrichinosisNematodeEndocrinologyInternal medicineImmunologyZoologyHormoneHelminthsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The immunocompetence handicap hypothesis (ICHH) proposes that testosterone enhances the expression of sexual traits but suppresses immune function. However, studies to test the hypothesis have shown mixed results. Alternatively, sexual traits, immune function, and parasite susceptibility may be mediated by the stress hormone corticosterone. Here, we report an experimental test of the ICHH that included the manipulation of both testosterone and parasites in male laboratory mice (Mus musculus L., 1758). We conducted a factorial experiment, injecting each individual mouse with testosterone or not and infecting them with the nematode parasite Trichinella spiralis (Owen, 1835) or not. As predicted, testosterone enhanced the scent attractiveness of male mice, whereas parasite infection reduced it, but only in male mice not injected with testosterone. However, we found no evidence that corticosterone is involved in mediating the effects of testosterone. These results confirm that maintaining high testosterone levels entails the cost of increased parasite abundance. This study provides direct evidence supporting the ICHH.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction→French-language works237,207→