MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160851899 · doi:10.1017/s003118200500898x

Concentration-dependent effects of waterborne zinc on population dynamics of <i>Gyrodactylus turnbulli</i> (Monogenea) on isolated guppies (<i>Poecilia reticulata</i>)

2005· article· en· W2160851899 on OpenAlexaff
C. GHEORGIU, David J. Marcogliese, Marilyn E. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueParasitology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGyrodactylusBiologyPoeciliaParasite hostingMonogeneaPopulationZoologyPopulation dynamics of fisheriesAquatic animalFish <Actinopterygii>GillFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of waterborne zinc (Zn) on Gyrodactylus population dynamics was studied on isolated guppies maintained at concentrations ranging from 0 to 240 microg Zn/l. After 1 week pre-exposure to Zn, each fish was experimentally infected with 3 gyrodactylids and parasite numbers were recorded daily on each fish until the fish either died or recovered from infection. Parasite establishment was most successful at 0 and 240 microg Zn/l (97%) compared with the intermediate Zn concentrations. Low to moderate concentrations of Zn were beneficial to the parasite, as evidenced by the concentration-dependent increase in peak parasite burden on recovered fish up to 120 microg Zn/l. In contrast, 240 microg Zn/l may have been toxic to the parasite, as both peak parasite burden (in fish that recovered from infection), and maximum rate of increase of the parasite population (in fish that died) declined at this concentration. The combined effect of infection and Zn is harmful to the fish, because mortality of infected fish (but not uninfected fish) increased with increasing Zn concentrations. We suggest that the observed mortality occurs because of the inability of fish to continuously produce mucous that is a key factor for protecting fish from both waterborne Zn and ectoparasites.

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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations42
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParasitologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207