Hysterothylacium brachyurum Ward & Magath 1917
Bibliographic record
Abstract
** Hysterothylacium brachyurum Ward & Magath, 1917 Synonyms: Contracaecum brachyurum (Ward & Magath, 1917) Van Cleave & Mueller, 1934; Thynnascaris brachyura (Ward & Magath, 1917) Margolis & Arthur, 1979 Description (after Van Cleave & Mueller 1934, and Rye & Baker 1984). With characteristics of the genus. Lips large and prominent with well developed interlabia. Lateral alae arise from the interlabia between the subventral and dorsal lips and extend posteriorly to about the level of the posterior end of the preventriculus. A pair of minute, blind-ending deirids are located within the alae at nerve ring level. Nerve ring about 0.5 behind anterior end (Fig. 79 A). Preventriculus 6.0–7.0 long, with “a clearly defined ventriculus”. Intestinal caecum 5.6 long, ventricular appendix relatively short, about 1.0 long. Tail tip of both sexes with few relatively large spines, sharply pointed (Fig. 79 B). Males: about 60 long and 0.9 wide. Spicules equal, about 0.84 long. Arrangement of male caudal papillae not clear. Females: about 80 to 90 long and 1.0 wide. Vulva “some distance” anterior to middle of body. Eggs in utero 0.060 x 0.050. Comments: Hysterothylacium brachyurum should be redescribed, especially as it is the type species of the genus. Moreover, an account of the life-history of H. brachyurum —like that provided by Rye & Baker (1992) for H. analarum —does not appear to be available. In view of the possibility that larvae of H. brachyurum occur in the organs and tissues of Canadian fishes the taxon is adorned with a double asterisk. H. brachyurum has been reported frequently from a variety of fresh-water hosts throughout North America but, as Rye & Baker (1984) pointed out, in most surveys no voucher specimens were deposited in permanent collections so identifications cannot be confirmed; there is evidence that H. brachyurum has been confused in the past with H. analarum and Raphidascaris acus (Rye & Baker 1984). Sites: intestinal lumen, liver, mesenteries, pyloric caeca Hosts: Ambloplites rupestris (4, 7, 8, 18, 19); Anguilla rostrata (3); Coregonus artedi (10, 14); Culaea inconstans (22); Esox lucius (4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21); Esox masquinongy (4, 7, 8, 18); Etheostoma exile (4, 7); Lepomis gibbosus (2, 18); Lota lota (3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 17, 19, 21); Micropterus dolomieu (2, 4, 7, 18, 20, 21); Micropterus salmoides (1, 2, 4, 7); Moxostoma anisurum (8); Notemigonus crysoleucas (4, 7); Notropis atherinoides (4, 8); Noturus flavus (21); Perca flavescens (12, 18, 19, 20, 22); Percopsis omiscomaycus (4, 7, 8, 21); Salvelinus fontinalis (3, 19, 22); Salvelinus fontinalis x Salvelinus namaycush (9, 13, 21, 22); Salvelinus malma (9, 11, 17); Salvelinus namaycush (9); Sander canadensis (8); Sander vitreus (4, 7, 8, 12, 18, 21) Distribution: Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec Records: Bangham & Hunter 1939 (ON); 2. Bangham 1941 (ON); 3. Bangham &Venard 1946 (ON); 4. Bangham 1951 (ON); 5. Worley & Bangham 1952 (QC); 6. Bangham & Adams 1954 (BC); 7. Bangham 1955 (ON); 8. Dechtiar 1972a (ON); 9. Mudry & Anderson 1977 (AB); 10. Watson 1977 (MB); 11. Anon. 1978 (BC); 12. Anthony 1978b (ON); 13. Dechtiar & Berst 1978 (ON); 14. Watson & Dick 1979 (MB); 15. Watson & Dick 1980 (MB); 16. Anthony 1983 (ON); 17. Arai & Mudry 1983 (BC); 18. Dechtiar & Christie 1988 (ON); 19. Dechtiar & Lawrie 1988 (ON); 20. Dechtiar & Nepszy 1988 (ON); 21. Dechtiar et al. 1988 (ON); 22. Dechtiar et al. 1989 (ON)
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".