Chemotactic and temperature-dependent responses of the Strongyloidoidea superfamily of nematodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Host-seeking behaviour and how a parasite identifies the correct host to infect remains a poorly understood area of parasitology. What is currently known is that host sensation and seeking behaviour is formed from a complex mixture of chemo-, thermo- and mechanosensory behaviours, of which chemosensation is the best studied. Previous studies of olfaction in parasitic nematodes suggested that this behaviour appears to be more closely related to target host and infection mode than phylogeny. However, there has not yet been a study comparing the chemotactic and temperature-dependent behaviours of very closely related parasitic and non-parasitic nematodes. To this end, we examined the temperature-dependent and chemotactic responses of the Strongyloidoidea superfamily of nematodes. We found differences in temperature response between the different species and within infective larvae. Chemotactic responses were highly divergent, with different attraction profiles between all species studied. When examining direct stimulation with fur, we found that it was insufficient to cause an attractive response. Overall, our results support the notion that olfactory sensation is more closely related to lifestyle and host range than phylogeny, and that multiple cues are required to initiate host-seeking behaviour.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".