MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133687417 · doi:10.2193/2009-114

No Evidence for Resistance to Fenbendazole in <i>Trichostrongylus tenuis</i> , a Nematode Parasite of the Red Grouse

2010· article· en· W2133687417 on OpenAlexaff
Ruth Cox, David Newborn, David Baines, Christopher Thomas, Thomas N. Sherratt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wildlife Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicHelminth infection and control
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsGrouseBiologyFenbendazoleTrichostrongylusAnthelminticLagopusEimeriaParasite hostingVeterinary medicinePopulationNematodeResistance (ecology)EcologyMicrobiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The parasitic nematode Trichostrongylus tenuis has a detrimental effect on red grouse ( Lagopus lagopus scoticus ) at the individual and population levels. Treatment using grit coated with the anthelmintic fenbendazole hydrochloride reduces parasite infection and increases grouse density. However, a frequent and low dose of anthelmintic increases selection pressure for parasite resistance, a serious practical and economic problem. We used an egg hatch assay to test resistance of T. tenuis from 12 moors in northern England, which differed in grit treatment intensity. The anthelmintic concentration that prevented 50% and 95% of T. tenuis eggs from hatching (ED 50 and ED 95 , respectively) did not differ among moors and were not related to treatment. We suggest annual monitoring and responsible anthelmintic use to prevent resistance so that medicated grit continues to enhance red grouse management.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wildlife ManagementSame topicHelminth infection and controlFrench-language works237,207