MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Coevolution between Lamellodiscus (Monogenea: Diplectanidae) and Sparidae (Teleostei): The Study Of a Complex Host-Parasite System

2002· article· en· W4241012727 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsMonogeneaBiologyTeleosteiSparidaeParasite hostingCoevolutionHost (biology)CyprinidaeZoologyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryGill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Host‐parasite coevolution was studied between Sparidae (Teleostei) fishes and their parasites of the genus Lamellodiscus (Monogenea, Diplectanidae) in the northwestern Mediterranean Sea. Molecular phylogenies were reconstructed for both groups. The phylogenetic tree of the Sparidae was obtained from previously published 16S mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences associated with new cytochrome‐b mtDNA sequences via a “total evidence” procedure. The phylogeny of Lamellodiscus species was reconstructed from 18S rDNA sequences that we obtained. Host‐parasite coevolution was studied through different methods: TreeFitter, TreeMap, and a new method, ParaFit. If the cost of a host switch is not assumed to be high for parasites, all methods agree on the absence of widespread cospeciation processes in this host‐parasite system. Host‐parasite associations were interpreted to be due more to ecological factors than to coevolutionary processes. Host specificity appeared not to be related to host‐parasite cospeciation.

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.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.251 · 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