MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Context-dependent life-history variation in a pond snail (<i>Lymnaea elodes</i>) exposed to desiccation and a sterilizing parasite

2004· article· en· W2545805840 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Gregory J. Sandland, Dennis J. Minchella

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAestivationSnailBiologyDesiccationLymnaeaPulmonataEcologyGastropodaFreshwater snailContext (archaeology)Intermediate hostMolluscicideLymnaea stagnalisInfectivityHost (biology)Zoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

:In this study we used a combination of field monitoring and laboratory experimentation to investigate the effects of desiccation and Echinostoma revolutum infection on life-history traits of the pond snail, Lymnaea elodes. Field-collected snails demonstrated a sharp decline in survivorship within 8 weeks of pond drying. Results from a corresponding laboratory experiment, where snails were exposed to parasites prior to aestivation, demonstrated that desiccation played a more important role in snail survival than E. revolutum infection. However, infection influenced host growth patterns as aestivated-infected snails were significantly larger at the end of the experiment relative to aestivated controls. In a second laboratory experiment, exposure after a period of aestivation resulted in higher levels of infection compared to snails that were continuously hydrated. Moreover, exposed-uninfected snails demonstrated higher mortality than either control or infected snails regardless of aestivation treatment. Results from this work 1) demonstrate the importance of incorporating multiple variables into life-history studies and 2) provide insight into the factors underlying host-parasite dynamics in the field.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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