MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113049349 · doi:10.1017/s0022149x20000747

Habitat selection and populations of<i>Corynosoma</i>(Acanthocephala) in the intestines of sea otters (<i>Enhydra lutris</i>) and seals

2020· article· en· W3113049349 on OpenAlexaff
Kyle M. Shanebeck, Jan Lakemeyer, Ursula Siebert, Kristina Lehnert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Helminthology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeStiftung Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover
KeywordsAcanthocephalaBiologyAbundance (ecology)HabitatEcologyPopulationReproductionFisheryZoologyHost (biology)Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acanthocephalans are common intestinal parasites of marine mammals, the most widespread of which is the genus Corynosoma. In this study, parasite infrapopulations of two closely related species of Corynosoma were examined: Corynosoma enhydri from sea otters (Enhydra lutris) in Alaska (n = 12) and California (n = 19), and Corynosoma strumosum from seals in Germany (n = 22). Prevalence of C. enhydri was 100% in Californian otters, with a mean abundance of 30, and 83% in Alaskan otters, with a mean abundance of 232. In seals, C. strumosum had a prevalence of 65%, with a mean abundance of 33. Female C. enhydri dominated both Californian (82%) and Alaskan (79%) infections, while, in seals, female C. strumosum made up 68% of the parasite population. Reproduction rates for C. enhydri, with 16% (California) and 18% (Alaska) of females mated, were low compared to C. strumosum in seals, of which 40% of females were mated. Habitat selection also differed significantly between the two species. Corynosoma enhydri was found most frequently in the second and third fifths of the small intestine, while C. strumosum was found most frequently in the fourth. The differences in habitat selection and prevalence analysed in this study may be related to a trade-off between growth and reproduction between the two species.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HelminthologySame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207