MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7109506589 · doi:10.26108/j6mj-3a78

Prevalence and phylogenetic relationships of Hepatozoon species infecting frogs of Nova Scotia

2006· article· en· W7109506589 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcadiaU-DEV · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhylogenetic treeHepatozoonNova scotiaMonophylyPhylogeneticsGenusInternal transcribed spacerRibosomal DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Species of the genus Hepatozoon are unicellular parasites of the protistan phylum Apicomplexa. Two species of Hepatozoon, H. catesbianae and H. clamatae, have previously been described inhabiting the erythrocytes of bullfrogs and green frogs in New York and Ontario. A number of the characteristics typically used to distinguish between members of this genus are shared between these two species, prompting speculation as to whether or not these organisms are in fact distinct species. Bullfrogs and green frogs were captured at various sites across Nova Scotia, blood samples were collected and analyzed for Hepatozoon parasites, and DNA was extracted from samples containing the parasites. The internal transcribed spacer (ITS-1) region of the nuclear rRNA genes from geographically diverse samples of both species was then sequenced and analyzed for nucleotide polymorphisms. Isolates of the two species found in Nova Scotia were separated by six polymorphic sites in their ITS-1 sequences. Phylogenetic analysis of this molecular data places each species in separate monophyletic groups. Comparison of the ITS-1 sequences between isolates from Nova Scotia and Ontario revealed that ITS-1 sequences of H. catesbianae from a previous study were mischaracterized as being those of H. clamatae. Phylogenetic data based on molecular variation and host cell cytopathology from this study provides the strongest evidence to date supporting the distinction between H. catesbianae and H. clamatae as separate species.

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 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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcadiaU-DEVSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207