Ancyrocephalidae (Monogenea) of Lake Tanganyika: does the Cichlidogyrus parasite fauna of Interochromis loocki (Teleostei, Cichlidae) reflect its hostâs phylogenetic affinities?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The faunal diversity of Lake Tanganyika, with its fish species flocks and its importance as a cradle and reservoir of ancient fish lineages seeding other radiations, has generated a considerable scientific interest in the fields of evolution and biodiversity. The Tropheini, an endemic Tanganyikan cichlid tribe, fills a peculiar phylogenetic position, being closely related to the haplochromine radiations of Lakes Malawi and Victoria. Several problems remain regarding their genus-level classification. For example, the monotypic genus Interochromis is phylogenetically nested within Petrochromis; its only representative, I. loocki, has often been reclassified. As monogenean flatworms are useful markers for fish phylogeny and taxonomy, the monogenean fauna of Interochromis loocki was examined and compared to that of other tropheine cichlids. Three new monogenean species belonging to Cichlidogyrus are described from Interochromis loocki: Cichlidogyrus buescheri Pariselle and Vanhove, sp. nov., Cichlidogyrus schreyenbrichardorum Pariselle and Vanhove, sp. nov. and Cichlidogyrus vealli Pariselle and Vanhove, sp. nov. Their haptoral anchors remind more of congeners infecting species of Petrochromis than of all Cichlidogyrus spp. hitherto described from other tropheine cichlids. Attachment organ morphology has been proven to mirror the phylogenetic affinities of Cichlidogyrus lineages. Therefore the monogenean parasite fauna of I. loocki reflects this hostâs position within Petrochromis. Moreover, I. loocki differs in habitat choice from Petrochromis spp. This study hence confirms that host range and host-specificity in Cichlidogyrus spp. parasitizing tropheines is determined by the hostâs phylogenetic position, rather than by a shared ecological niche.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".