Revealing the faunal tapestry: co-evolution and historical biogeography of hosts and parasites in marine systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parasites are integral components of marine ecosystems, a general observation accepted by parasitologists, but often considered of trifling significance to the broader community of zoologists. Parasites, however, represent elegant tools to explore the origins, distribution and maintenance of biodiversity. Among these diverse assemblages, host and geographic ranges described by various helminths are structured and historically constrained by genealogical and ecological associations that can be revealed and evaluated using phylogenetic methodologies within the context of frameworks and hypotheses for co-evolution and historical biogeography. Despite over 200 years of sporadic investigations of helminth systematics, knowledge of parasite faunal diversity in chondrichthyan and osteichthyan fishes, seabirds and marine mammals remains to be distilled into a coherent and comprehensive picture that can be assessed using phylogenetic approaches. Phylogenetic studies among complex host-parasite assemblages that encompass varying temporal and geographic scales are the critical context for elucidating biodiversity and faunal structure, and for identifying historical and contemporary determinants of ecological organization and biogeographic patterns across the marine biosphere. Insights from phylogenetic inference indicate (1) the great age of marine parasite faunas; (2) a significant role for colonization in diversification across a taxonomic continuum at deep and relatively recent temporal scales; and (3) a primary role for allopatric speciation. Integration of ecological and phylogenetic knowledge from the study of parasites is synergistic, contributing substantial insights into the history and maintenance of marine systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".