Ranavirus Amplification in Low-Diversity Amphibian Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era where emerging infectious diseases are a serious threat to biodiversity, epidemiological patterns need to be identified, particularly the complex mechanisms driving the dynamics of multi-host pathogens in natural communities. Many amphibian species have faced unprecedented population declines associated with diseases. Yet, specific processes shaping host-pathogen relationships within and among communities for amphibian pathogens such as ranaviruses (RV) remain poorly understood. To address this gap, we conducted a comprehensive study of RV in low-diversity amphibian communities in north-western Canada to assess the effects of biotic factors (species identity, species richness, abundance) and abiotic factors (conductivity, pH) on the pathogen prevalence and viral loads. Across 2 years and 18 sites, with communities of up to three hosts (wood frog, Rana sylvatica ; boreal chorus frog, Pseudacris maculata ; Canadian toad, Anaxyrus hemiophrys ), we observed that RV prevalence nearly doubled with each additional species in a community, suggesting an amplification effect in aquatic, as well as terrestrial life-history stages. Infection intensity among infected wood frogs and boreal chorus frogs also significantly increased with an increase in species richness. Interestingly, we did not observe any effects of host abundance or abiotic factors, highlighting the importance of including host identity and species richness when investigating multi-host pathogens. Ultimately, only such a comprehensive approach can improve our understanding of complex and often highly context-dependent host-pathogen interactions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".