Factors determining the in vitro emergence of sexual stages of <i>Hepatozoon clamatae</i> from erythrocytes of the Green Frog (<i>Rana clamitans</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual reproduction of apicomplexan parasites in haematophagous arthropods requires that intracellular sexual stages of these protozoa escape vertebrate erythrocytes in the blood meal. Although cues that signal sexual stages of the human malaria parasite (Plasmodium falciparum Welch, 1897) to emerge from erythrocytes are well documented, such signals are poorly known for other blood-dwelling Apicomplexa. The objective of this comparative study was to investigate conditions required to induce in vitro emergence of sexual stages of Hepatozoon clamatae (Stebbins, 1905) from frog erythrocytes. Blood was drawn from Green Frogs (Rana clamitans Latreille in Sonnini de Manoncourt and Latreille, 1801 = Lithobates clamitans clamitans (Latreille in Sonnini de Manoncourt and Latreille, 1801)) infected with H. clamatae and treated with solutions of various concentrations of saline, pH, and xanthurenic acid at different temperatures. Hypertonic saline solutions of 200 and 222 mmol/L at pH 7.4 and 7.7 elicited emergence of nearly 100% of gamonts from frog erythrocytes, but at pH 8.0 resulted in decreased emergence. Solutions containing 1, 10, and 100 μmol/L xanthurenic acid increased gamont emergence at saline concentrations of 156, 178, and 244 mmol/L, but decreased emergence at 200 and 222 mmol/L. Gamont emergence increased as incubation temperatures increased from 18 to 26 °C. These results suggest that conditions necessary for emergence of sexual stages of bloodstream Apicomplexa from erythrocytes vary among genera.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".