Prosthenhystera obesa (Digenea), parasite of Salminus maxillosus (Characidae) of the floodplain of the upper Paraná river, Paraná Brazil: influence of the size and sex of host.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A hundred and twenty-six specimens of Salminus maxillosus Valenciennes, 1849, were analyzed. Fishes were collected in the floodplain of the upper Paraná river in lotic environments, represented by the Paraná and the Ivinheima rivers and by the Cortado channel, and a semi-lotic one represented by the Baía river. Capture of hosts was undertaken by gill nets of various mesh sizes. Prior to light microscopy, the specimens were fixed in AFA (alcohol, formalin, acetic acid) under slight coverslip pressure, stained in Mayer’s acid carmalum, dehydrated in an alcohol series, cleared in creosote and mounted in Canada balsam. Prevalence of Prosthenhystera obesa Diesing, 1850 was 14.3% and mean intensity of infection 1.75 (range: 1-3). Prevalence of P. obesa is not correlated with standard length of host, a fact that may indicate homogeneity in behavior of S. maxillosus during part of its development. Infection intensity is directly related with increase in size of host. There was no influence of sex of host on prevalence and infection intensity of P. obesa. This fact may suggest similarity in behavior with regard to feeding habit and habitat of males and females. All parasitized hosts were captured in lotic environments
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 | 0.001 | 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".