MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949171159 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2019-0021

Parasites of Prussian carp (<i>Carassius gibelio</i>): an invasive species in Alberta, Canada

2019· article· en· W2949171159 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Hasanna Kucher, T. M. Stock, M. Das

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
FundersAlberta Environment and Parks
KeywordsCarassiusBiologyCarpPredationCyprinidaeFreshwater fishZoologyParasite hostingIntroduced speciesIntermediate hostEcologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Host (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A cyprinid, the Prussian carp (Carassius gibelio (Bloch, 1782)), has become an established invasive fish in several watersheds in Alberta, Canada. Originating in Eurasia, Prussian carp negatively impact native fish through predation, competition, and habitat modification. Prior to this study, nothing was known regarding the external and internal parasites of these fish in North America, although nine studies had been conducted in Europe and Asia. We examined 22 fish (20 female, 2 male) ranging from 3 to 5 years of age and recorded morphological features, stomach contents, and performed standard necropsy examinations for parasites. One parasite species, the acanthocephalan Pomphorhynchus bulbocolli Linkins in Van Cleave, 1919, was found in three fish (14%), with a mean intensity of 1.0. This is a new host record and the first report of any acanthocephalan parasite in Prussian carp. We conclude that Prussian carp are not introducing any novel parasites into native fish and that they are resistant to most infections by native parasites.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207