MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316346686 · doi:10.14411/fp.2016.011

Intraspecific morphometric variation in myxosporeans

2016· article· en· W2316346686 on OpenAlexaff
Yanhua Zhai, Christopher M. Whipps, Zemao Gu, Qingxiang Guo, Zizhen Wu, Hongmei Wang, Yang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueFolia Parasitologica · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyxozoan Parasites in Aquatic Species
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesProgram for New Century Excellent Talents in University
KeywordsBiologyIntraspecific competitionSporeParasite hostingZoologyEcologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morphometric data from spores of ten myxosporean species were statistically analysed to explore myxosporean intraspecific variation in measurements when obtained from a sample from: (1) the same plasmodium, (2) different plasmodia from the same host and (3) different host individuals and localities. In some cases, significant differences in spore dimensions were found between samples from the same plasmodium, highlighting the difficulty of obtaining representative measurements of myxosporean spore. In addition, significant differences in spore dimensions were found when plasmodia from the same site of infection were compared, suggesting that measurements of spores should come from several different plasmodia of the sampling to increase the reliability of the morphology data. Moreover, significant differences in spore dimensions were observed for most spore dimensions when data were compared between localities. In all cases, there was clear overlap in ranges of dimensions even when means differed significantly. The present statistical analysis shows that intraspecific morphometric variation of myxosporean species commonly occurs, highlighting the importance of reporting ranges of measurements for a species, not just the mean dimensions, and taking into account all evidence when assigning or describing myxosporean species.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFolia ParasitologicaSame topicMyxozoan Parasites in Aquatic SpeciesFrench-language works237,207