Intestinal parasites of dogs (<i>Canis lupus familiaris</i>) in Svalbard (Norway): low prevalence and limited transmission with wildlife
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Domesticated dogs (Canis lupus familiaris Linnaeus, 1758) are widely kept on all continents and could share parasites with free-living animals. To understand the transmission of intestinal parasites between dogs kept on the four dog stations and wildlife in Svalbard, 170 faecal samples from dogs and 203 faecal samples from wildlife, including Arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus (Linnaeus, 1758); n = 62), Svalbard reindeer (Rangifer tarandus platyrhynchus (Vrolik, 1829); n = 106), sibling vole (Microtus levis Miller, 1908; n = 63), Pink-footed Goose (Anser brachyrhynchus Baillon, 1834; n = 30), Little Auk (Alle alle (Linnaeus, 1758); n = 49), and Black-legged Kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla (Linnaeus, 1758); n = 18), were individually screened for the presence of intestinal parasites using microscopy and PCR and nucleotide sequencing methods. Additionally, the results of the study were compared with previous studies performed in the same area. The roundworm Toxascaris leonina (Linstow, 1902) was found microscopically and by PCR in a dog (n = 1). The specific DNA of three species of parasitic protists was detected in dogs from different yards. Phylogenetic analyses revealed the presence of Cryptosporidium canis Fayer, Trout, Xiao, Morgan, Lal and Dubey, 2001 (n = 1), Encephalitozoon cuniculi Levaditi, Nicolau and Schoen, 1923 genotype II (n = 4), and dog-specific Enterocytozoon bieneusi Desportes, Le Charpentier, Galian, Bernard, Cochand-Priollet, Lavergne, Ravisse and Modigliani, 1985 genotypes (n = 12). This study showed overall a low prevalence of intestinal parasites in dogs in Svalbard and possible but minimal transmission with wildlife.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".