MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

INTENSITY-DEPENDENT ALTERATION OF MINNOW (PIMEPHALES PROMELAS) BEHAVIOR BY A BRAIN-ENCYSTING TREMATODE

2002· article· en· W2150245536 on OpenAlexafffund
Sho Shirakashi, Cameron P. Goater

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Parasitology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPimephales promelasMinnowBiologyCyprinidaeParasite hostingHost (biology)ZoologyPhoxinusLarvaFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the relationship between the numbers of brain-encysting trematodes (Ornithodiplostomum ptychocheilus) and the magnitude of altered behaviors in fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas). Because cysts develop within a brain region that integrates visual stimuli with motor response. we evaluated the standard optomotor response (OMR). Monitoring this task involved recording the time minnows spent following a spinning drum, on which alternating black and white stripes had been painted. Minnows were exposed to 0, 5, 20, 120, and 300 cercariae and then their OMR was evaluated at 2-wk postinfection. Surprisingly, only minnows that had high numbers of parasites (155 +/- 31 worms/fish) or low numbers of parasites (3 +/- 3 worms/ fish) differed significantly in their optomotor performance compared with controls. Reduced OMR of heavily infected minnows was positively correlated with reduction in minnow activity. In contrast, reduced OMR in lightly infected minnows was independent of host activity and was likely associated with the rapid development of parasite larvae within the optic tecta. The nonlinear relationship between parasite intensity and effect on host behavior was consistent with an earlier study, but the underlying mechanisms producing this pattern are unknown.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

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

Citations27
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ParasitologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207