MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Brain-encysting parasites affect visually-mediated behaviours of fathead minnows

2001· article· en· W2544808040 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sho Shirakashi, Cameron P. Goater

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPimephales promelasMinnowHost (biology)Affect (linguistics)BiologyPredationZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyFisheryPsychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many populations of fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas Rafinesque) in northern Alberta, Canada, contain individuals with hundreds of trematode (Ornithodiplostomum ptychocheilus Faust) cysts on the surface of their brains. Most cysts are located on the optic tecta, a region known to play a role in integrating visual and motor stimuli, especially in schooling fish. We determined the effect of infection on visually-mediated behaviours of fathead minnows by evaluating host performance in an optomotor swimming task. Monitoring this task involved recording the time minnows spent following a spinning drum, onto which alternating black and white stripes had been painted. After controlling for host activity and host size, minnows containing an average of 18 (low-intensity) or 98 larvae (high-intensity) reduced their time spent following the spinning drum by 42% and 26%, respectively, compared to uninfected controls. Low-intensity minnows also took longer than controls to respond to a change in the direction of the spinning drum. Reduced optomotor performance has the potential to affect a host’s ability to detect and respond to prey, predators and conspecifics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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