MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280572819 · doi:10.3390/pathogens11050565

Simplifying Schistosome Surveillance: Using Molecular Cercariometry to Detect and Quantify Cercariae in Water

2022· review· en· W4280572819 on OpenAlexafffund
Brooke A. McPhail, Kelsey Froelich, Ronald L. Reimink, Patrick C. Hanington

Bibliographic record

VenuePathogens · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsSnailBiologyEnvironmental DNAEcologyZoologyEvolutionary biologyBiodiversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avian schistosomes are considered a public health nuisance due to their ability to cause swimmer's itch when accidentally encountering humans rather than their intended avian hosts. Researchers have been monitoring their presence and abundance through snail collections and cercariometry. Cercariometry methods have evolved over the last several decades to detect individual schistosome species from a single water sample, simplifying the monitoring of these parasites. This methodological evolution coincides with the development of the field of environmental DNA (eDNA) where genetic material is extracted from environmental samples, rather than individual organisms. While there are some limitations with using molecular cercariometry, notably the cost and its inability to differentiate between life cycle stages, it substantially reduces the labor required to study trematode populations. It also can be used in complement with snail collections to understand the composition of avian schistosomes in an environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathogensSame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207