Does the number of genital organs matter? Case of the seal tapeworm <i>Diphyllobothrium</i> (syn. <i>Diplogonoporus</i>) <i>tetrapterum</i> (Cestoda: Diphyllobothriidea)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seal tapeworm Diphyllobothrium tetrapterum (von Siebold, 1848) Baer, 1932 (syn. Diplogonoporus tetrapterus) is exceptional among cestodes because it possesses two types of the strobila, one with a multiple set of genitalia per proglottid and another with a single set of reproductive organs per proglottid. In this study, Diph. tetrapterum is redescribed on the basis of extensive, well-fixed material from the northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus (Linnaeus, 1758)) from Alaska, USA. A critical morphological and molecular study of comprehensive material from several hosts throughout the Northern Hemisphere is provided. As a result, Diplogonoporus mutabilis Belopolskaia, 1960 and Diplogonoporus violettae Yurakhno, 1986 become junior synonyms of Diph. tetrapterum. Our study provides evidence of intraspecific and even individual variability of Diph. tetrapterum in the number of genital complexes, thus making this generic feature questionable for circumscription of the diphyllobothriid genera. The seal tapeworm has been found exclusively in the Northern Hemisphere and exhibits a wide (euryxenous) specificity at the level of the definitive host, having been found in a number of seals, the sea otter (Enhydra lutris (Linnaeus, 1758)), and exceptionally, in other terrestrial mammals. Plerocercoids of Diph. tetrapterum are reported from the second (fish) intermediate host for the first time, in this case the pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha (Walbaum, 1792)) from Alaska.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".