ArticleParasitology research2020
Morphological comparison of genetically differentiated Polymorphus cf. minutus types.
Article in Parasitology research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and diversity of Acanthocephala in stream-dwelling amphipods (Parasitology · 2025Article
- Intermediate host patterns of acanthocephalans in the Weser river system: co-invasionParasitology · 2023Article
- Article
- Warming can alter host behavior in a similar manner to infection with behavior-manipulating parasites.Oecologia · 2020Article
- Application of DNA barcoding and morphometric analysis in differentiating cystacanths of Polymorphus species (Acanthocephala: Polymorphidae) from central Alberta, Canada.Parasitology research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present study, we analyzed the morphology of three genetic types of the bird-infecting acanthocephalan Polymorphus cf. minutus (PspT1, PspT2, PspT3), mainly based on the cystacanth-stage obtained from amphipods (Gammarus fossarum, Gammarus pulex, Gammarus roeselii, Echinogammarus spp.). Males and females were pooled as there was no considerable difference between the sexes concerning the hook measurements. Additionally, we conducted a laboratory infection of one domestic duck for each Polymorphus type, to compare their performance and localization in this host species, and to obtain adult specimens for morphological comparison. The recovery rate from the ducks 4 weeks after infection was 16% for PspT1, 23.8% for PspT2, and 25% for PspT3. The adult worms were gravid, and the females contained mature eggs. Hook size did not differ considerably between cystacanths and adults of the respective type. The three Polymorphus types could be distinguished based on the cystacanth stage by a linear discriminant analysis that included hook measurements, proboscis length, proboscis width, and number of longitudinal hook rows and hooks per row. Furthermore, PspT3 was more different from PspT1 and PspT2 than the latter types from each other. Mainly the number of longitudinal hook rows differed in PspT3 from the existing descriptions of P. minutus (mainly 14 vs. mainly 16 rows). Potentially, PspT3 could be a non-indigenous parasite that was introduced with G. roeselii and that adapted to use the indigenous G. pulex as a host, while PspT2 might have been introduced to central Europe together with Echinogammarus spp.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31786696What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.