Worm expulsion is independent of alterations in composition of the colonic bacteria that occur during experimental <i>Hymenolepis diminuta</i>-infection in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tapeworm Hymenolepis diminuta fails to establish in mice. Given the potential for helminth-bacteria interaction in the gut and the influence that commensal bacteria exert on host immunity, we tested if worm expulsion was related to alterations in the gut microbiota. Specific pathogen-free (SPF) mice, treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics, or germ-free wild-type mice were infected with H. diminuta, gut bacterial composition assessed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing, and worm counts, blood eosinophilia, goblet cells, splenic IL-4, -5 and -10, and colonic cytokines/chemokines mRNA were assessed. Effects of a PBS-soluble extract of adult H. diminuta on bacterial growth in vitro was tested. H. diminuta-infected mice displayed increased α and β diversity in colonic mucosa-associated and fecal bacterial communities, characterized by increased Lachnospiraceae and clostridium cluster XIVa. In vitro analysis revealed that the worm extract promoted the growth of anaerobic bacteria on M2GSC agar. H. diminuta-infection was accompanied by increased Th2 immune responses, and colon from infected mice had increased levels of IL-10, IL-25, Muc2, trefoil factor 3, and β2-defensin mRNA. SPF-mice treated with antibiotics, or germ-free mice, expelled H. diminuta with kinetics similar to control SPF mice. In both settings, measurements of Th2-immune responses were not significantly different across the groups. Thus, while infection with H. diminuta results in subtle but distinct changes to the colonic microbiota, we have no evidence to support an essential role for gut bacteria in the expulsion of the worm from the mouse host.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".