MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Host mortality, predation and the evolution of parasite virulence

2003· article· en· W2134776164 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Jui Lin Choo, Paul Williams, Troy Day

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirulencePredationBiologyHost (biology)EcologyExperimental evolutionPopulationPredatorEvolutionary biologyZoologyGeneDemographyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One of the most accepted views in the theoretical literature on virulence evolution is that a parasite's virulence will evolve to higher levels when its host's background mortality rate increases. Surprisingly, however, although many sources of background mortality involve predation, there has not yet been any theoretical research that explicitly considers how the dynamics of this important ecological interaction affects virulence evolution. Here, we consider how predation affects virulence evolution by explicitly introducing a predator into a classical susceptible–infected–susceptible epidemiological model. We find that, contrary to previous predictions, different sources of host mortality affect virulence evolution in different ways. Moreover, the way in which virulence evolution is affected depends on how tightly coupled the predator's dynamics are to the host population, and this can result in somewhat counterintuitive results. For example, indirect ecological effects can cause elevated host mortality to result in the evolution of lower parasite virulence, even if this elevated mortality arises from factors unrelated to predation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations73
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207