A molecular approach to the community ecology of parasites of freshwater fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Freshwater fish have been model hosts in the study of the community and evolutionary ecology of parasites for decades. Most studies have dealt only with adult parasites, although larval stages often dominate fish parasite communities. In addition, few studies include replicates of both host species and sampling localities. For this thesis, both larval and adult parasites were surveyed in six fish species ( Notemigonus crysoleucas, Pimephales notatus, Perca flavescens, Etheostoma nigrum, Lepomis gibbosus, Ambloplites rupestris ) collected from six localities in the St. Lawrence River and molecular techniques were used to distinguish species of strigeid metacercariae (Platyhelminthes: Trematoda). Novel primers were developed to sequence the barcode region of the cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) gene and sequences of internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions of ribosomal DNA were also obtained. Both markers indicated unexpectedly high numbers of species in strigeid metacercariae, but resolution between species was clearer with COI than with ITS sequences. Strigeid species inhabiting the lens of the eye of fish were significantly less host specific than species inhabiting other tissues, possibly due to limited immune activity in the lens. Patterns of host specificity were consistent across the separate fish communities, which included fish species that are ecologically distinctive but closely related. Together, these findings suggest that physiological incompatibility between host and parasite is a more important determinant of host specificity than the ecological availability of host species to parasites in strigeid metacercariae. The high host specificity of most strigeid species had important effects on the parasite communities as a whole. Closely related fish species showed a significant tendency to have similar parasite communities that was much stronger than the tendency of parasite communities in spatially proximate fish to be similar. Geographic distance was strongly associated with parasite community similarity only when comparisons were limited to fish of the same species. Host taxonomy explained much more structure in parasite communities than spatial categories, suggesting that host phylogeny is more important than habitat in determining parasite community composition and abundance.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".