MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400768433

Occurrence of the lung fluke, Paragonimus heterotremus in Manipur, India.

2003· article· en· W2400768433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T. Shantikumar Singh

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasites and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParagonimusParagonimiasisHelminthsHost (biology)Intermediate hostBiologyFecesZoologyParasite hostingPathologyVeterinary medicineMedicineEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the natural crustacean host, the Paragonimus species, and to investigate the potential host-parasite relationship between Manipur Paragonimus and some of the laboratory animals. METHODS: The laboratory animals such as puppies, albino rats and Swiss mice were infected orally with metacercariae isolated from the fresh water crabs, Potamiscus manipurensis. The fecal specimens of the experimentally infected animals were examined microscopically for Paragonimus eggs at regular intervals. The animals were autopsied on days 35 to approximately 328 after infection and the isolated worms were flattened between glass slides and fixed in 70% alcohol. The worms were stained with carmine and mounted with Canada balsam for morphological studies. The eggs were collected in 5% formol saline solution for microscopy. The flukes were classified into 4 developmental stages. RESULTS: A total of 11 worms, 5 mature, 5 immature and 1 pre-adult were recovered. The morphological features of the metacercariae, worms and eggs were similar to those of Paragonimus heterotremus. CONCLUSION: Manipur is one of the rare areas in the world where Paragonimus heterotremus is prevalent and the puppies are ideal experimental animal host. This species may be one of the important causes of paragonimiasis in animals and humans in Manipur.

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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicParasites and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207