SEPS emblem
SEPS
Society for Evolutionary Parasite Systematics

Research collection

Source-linked parasite research

M. R. Dwyer · 22 October 2026

We connect accessible teaching material with the source records, measurements and comparisons that researchers can inspect. Species discovery begins with careful specimens, diagnostic characters and defensible comparisons. These reports distinguish observations, exploratory calculations and proposed studies.

Author-reviewed technical and educational reports, with source-linked data and figures. Independent computational checks passed. These reports retain their exploratory scope and do not establish clinical diagnostic validation or a new species determination.

Reports and project folders

Technical / exploratory report

SEPS:PRISM methods for specimen linked parasite morphology

We specify a reproducible route from specimen images to defensible morphological claims. SEPS:PRISM separates acquisition, boundary review, diagnostic measurement, candidate comparison and expert interpretation. We define the mathematical quantities that support conventional measurements, polygon descriptors, elliptic Fourier analysis and landmark shape analysis, then connect each quantity to calibration, tracing and sampling assumptions. The accompanying empirical analyses use recovered host counts, two photographed nematode profiles and published pentastome landmarks. They demonstrate specific computations rather than validated automated identification. We treat image readability, measurement accuracy and taxonomic adequacy as separate outcomes. This distinction allows useful observations to survive incomplete records while preventing a polished derivative from supplying evidence that the specimen never provided.

SEPS FUZZARIA Evidence and Claim Limits Final · PDF

SEPS HookFuse Morphometric Methods Final · PDF

SEPS PRISM Research Architecture Final · PDF

SEPS TEGUMENT Source and Boundary Review Final · PDF

Technical / exploratory report

Source linked morphometry of two nematode image profiles

We recover two visible rim profiles from one brightfield nematode photograph and compute measurements from saved source-coordinate polygons. The profiles have areas of 2856.2 and 3292.88 squared source pixels, maximum Feret diameters of 68.84 and 73.54 pixels, and circularities of 0.9631 and 0.9766. We then calculate elliptic Fourier coefficients directly from the actual traces and quantify reconstruction error over 512 perimeter positions. At eight harmonics, root mean squared reconstruction error reaches approximately 0.097 and 0.116 source pixels. These small errors describe the selected polygons rather than anatomical accuracy. We retain neutral region labels, explicit tracing provenance and missing physical calibration. The study supplies a reproducible geometric replacement for ambiguous legacy figures while reserving taxonomic and biological comparisons for independently reviewed, comparable specimens.

Data and tables
Technical / exploratory report

Host grouped reanalysis of published pentastome landmarks

We reanalyze published Raillietiella orientalis landmark configurations while preserving host grouping and an unresolved repeated specimen identifier. The source contains 39 ten-landmark configurations, 38 printed specimen identifiers and 14 host groups across five host species. Our primary analysis excludes both configurations with the ambiguous identifier and retains 37 configurations. Generalized Procrustes alignment and PCA assign 35.08% and 20.21% of shape variance to the first two components. An exploratory comparison of equally weighted host means gives a host-label permutation p value of 0.2387. Alternative repeated-identifier decisions change that value to 0.1192, 0.1203 or 0.0993. These results concern a specifically defined secondary analysis and do not reproduce all estimands in the original publication. The study demonstrates how identity and sampling hierarchy affect a reproducible reference comparison.

Data and tables
Technical / exploratory report

Source linked scanning electron microscopy: comparative morphology and calibration corrections

We reconcile two visually similar but biologically distinct scanning electron microscopy sources. The multipanel montage depicts Linguatula serrata from Shamsi and colleagues, whereas the three-panel image depicts Raillietiella orientalis from Sapion-Miranda and colleagues. We retain their identities and source attributions. A recorded endpoint pair and a 100 micrometer scale bar in the Linguatula montage yield a projected separation of 137.18 micrometers. A selected endpoint and bar perturbation produces a sensitivity range of 131.02 to 143.52 micrometers, which we do not interpret as a confidence interval. The source comparison supports careful character documentation and illustrates why a measurement can be reproducible while its anatomical interpretation still requires review. We also identify conflicting scale overlays in three legacy SEM figures, retire the unsupported dimensions, and recover an overview that retains its original 500 micrometer instrument bar.

Data and tables
Technical / exploratory report

Parasite burden records and ecological inference in South Florida

We reconstruct a 33-row host-count transcription and distinguish the questions it can answer from those that require examination-level evidence. The archive contains 28 cottonmouth records with 178 recorded parasites and five banded watersnake records with two. Sixteen cottonmouth rows and one watersnake row contain positive values. Two cottonmouth rows account for 57.3% of the cottonmouth count. We recalculate denominator-specific summaries, conditional uncertainty, count concentration and leave-one-record-out influence. We also reconcile the separate 26-row county summary and the positive lizard series without pooling their observational units. We develop a specimen-linked ecological analysis that separates detection, burden, coinfection and transmission. The resulting data and figures provide reproducible descriptive findings while leaving population prevalence, taxon-specific interaction and geographic risk unresolved.

SEPS South Florida Parasite Research Final · PDF

Data and tables
Technical / exploratory report

Microscopy evidence and inference in Cyclospora research

We examine how a microscopy reference can support recognition without implying viability, infectivity or validated automated diagnosis. We reconstruct the five-reader comparison reported by Ma and colleagues and pair it with authenticated CDC DPDx images. Across five readers, ultraviolet fluorescence agreement ranges from 74% to 94%, whereas modified acid-fast agreement ranges from 80% to 90% on the same 50-specimen set. Reader dependence, shared specimens and differences among biological endpoints prevent a single accuracy value from summarizing the problem. We specify source-linked image records and a prospective paired evaluation within SEPS:PRISM. The resulting gallery and reader comparison support education and study design; they do not establish clinical performance of SEPS.

SEPS Cyclospora Comparative Microscopy Final · PDF

Data and tables
Technical / exploratory report

SEPS PARAPLEX analysis of recorded reptile parasite assemblages

We apply the PARAPLEX ecological layer of SEPS:PRISM to 194 reptile observation rows in the recovered necropsy master workbook. The rows identify 81 hosts. Seventy-three hosts have positive parasite-group records and eight have explicit none entries. Forty-seven hosts have records in at least two broad groups. We retain unknown group cells and do not estimate population prevalence. The pentastome subtotal comprises 33 recorded organisms across 20 Basiliscus vittatus hosts, two across two Anolis equestris hosts and three in one Thamnophis sauritus. The first two components reconcile the 35-organism positive lizard summary at aggregate level. We preserve five repeated sample keys and separate 12 follow-up identification rows from new examinations. Five follow-up rows have candidates with agreeing host labels and counts; two have host-label conflicts, three have count mismatches and two lack a sample-key match. The resulting figures and tables support reproducible descriptions of the archive while identifying exactly which links and observation fields constrain ecological inference.

SEPS PARAPLEX Recorded Assemblages Final · PDF

Data and tables
E01 Individual Host Countspublic technical report

E01 Individual Host Counts

Individual counts from 28 cottonmouth and five banded watersnake inventory rows. A zero denotes the recorded value, not an independently verified negative examination. We retain all values, including high counts, without allocating them to organs or parasite taxa. Source: Dwyer, archival synthesis, Appendix A.

E02 Burden Concentration and Influencepublic technical report

E02 Burden Concentration and Influence

Left: cumulative share of the cottonmouth count after ordering rows by descending count. Right: exact leave-one-row-out means, (178 - x_i)/27. These values quantify influence and do not justify deleting observations. The display contains no simulated hosts and supplies no population confidence interval.

E03 Denominator Specific Summariespublic technical report

E03 Denominator Specific Summaries

Left: positive inventory-row fractions with conditional 95% Wilson intervals (Wilson, 1927). The binomial intervals assume independent comparable examinations and do not correct unknown eligibility or count misclassification. Right: count means under the two explicit row denominators. We do not label these fractions prevalence until examination eligibility is resolved.

E04 Published PCR Sensitivitypublic literature figure

E04 Published PCR Sensitivity

We redraw the reported true-positive counts from Palmisano et al. (2025), Table 3, and recompute 95% Wilson intervals. These intervals differ in method from the source publication. Sample-type groups do not establish a randomized comparison, and the values do not measure SEPS performance.

E05 Historical Denominator Sensitivitypublic technical report

E05 Historical Denominator Sensitivity

Holding each historical numerator fixed, we calculate fractions under both reported inventory denominators. This is an arithmetic sensitivity comparison. It neither chooses the eligible denominator nor asserts that the numerator remains valid under a revised examination set.

N01 Source Linked Rim Tracesresearch figure; boundary review pending

N01 Source Linked Rim Traces

Source: 2023BaViNematode9(3).jpg. We show the full frame and enlarged crops with provisional polygon traces of two apparent bright rims. We preserve the source color and embedded microscope pointer. Cropping and display resizing constitute the only image operations. R1 and R2 do not imply separate specimens, homologous landmarks or a taxonomic determination. No physical scale is available.

N02 Rim Size and Shaperesearch figure; boundary review pending

N02 Rim Size and Shape

We recompute polygon area, Feret dimensions, circularity and Feret ratio from saved source-coordinate traces. Whiskers show a declared uniform radial displacement of ±2 source pixels; they are sensitivity ranges, not confidence intervals. R1 and R2 share one image and do not supply biological replication.

N03 Fourier Reconstruction and Errorresearch figure; boundary review pending

N03 Fourier Reconstruction and Error

We calculate elliptic Fourier coefficients from the piecewise-linear, constant-speed polygon parameterization and reconstruct 512 equally spaced perimeter positions. Root mean squared Euclidean error compares each reconstruction with the saved polygon. H = 32 retains more detail than H = 2 but does not create independent anatomical evidence. Source photograph pixels remain unchanged.

N04 Area Normalized Rim Overlayresearch figure; boundary review pending

N04 Area Normalized Rim Overlay

We center each polygon at its area centroid, rotate it to the principal axis of 256 equally spaced boundary samples, and divide both coordinates by the square root of polygon area. The resulting profiles each have unit area. We do not treat their vertices as homologous landmarks or use this display as a taxonomic test.

P01 Reference Shape PCApublic secondary analysis

P01 Reference Shape PCA

We recompute generalized Procrustes alignment and PCA from Westfall et al. (2019), Supporting Information S1 and S2. Both configurations carrying the ambiguous printed ID 29402_A_PytMol are excluded. Circles are configurations; diamonds are host means. Codes use the first two letters of each binomial component. AgCo denotes Agkistrodon conanti, interpreted from the southern Florida sampling locality; the source reports Agkistrodon piscivorus. The code dictionary preserves original labels. Clusters and PCA axes do not establish species identity.

P02 Repeated Identity Sensitivitypublic secondary analysis

P02 Repeated Identity Sensitivity

We permute host-species labels over equally weighted host mean shapes using 9,999 permutations. Each scenario changes only the treatment of two configurations with one repeated printed identifier. The dotted 0.05 line provides a conventional reference, not a decision rule selected after viewing the results. These exploratory results do not replicate every model in the original publication.

P03 Reference Host Replicationpublic secondary analysis

P03 Reference Host Replication

Counts of retained parasite landmark configurations for each of the 14 hosts in the primary analysis. Multiple parasites from one host do not create additional independent host replicates. Sources: Westfall et al. (2019), S1 and S2.

C01 Published Reader Variationpublic literature figure

C01 Published Reader Variation

We redraw counts from Ma et al. (2025), Table 1. The set contains 35 Cyclospora-positive, five Cystoisospora-positive and ten negative specimens. Repeated reader evaluations do not increase the number of independent specimens from 50 to 250. The right panel uses the source table denominator of 50 evaluations per reader; it is not a false-negative rate conditional on infection.

C02 CDC Microscopy Galleryreference gallery; retain CDC credits

C02 CDC Microscopy Gallery

CDC DPDx (2019), Cyclosporiasis gallery. We preserve source pixels and source arrows, arrange panels, and resize them for display. In panel F, the yellow arrow marks Cyclospora cayetanensis and the red arrow marks Cryptosporidium parvum. Panels show different preparations and specimens; they do not constitute repeated measurements of one oocyst. We infer no physical scale from display size or source magnification.

M02 Observation and Interpretation Ledgerspublic methods figure

M02 Observation and Interpretation Ledgers

The observation ledger retains source-linked measurements. The interpretation ledger connects each conclusion to its evidence, alternatives and reviewer. Multiple analyses of one source image do not become independent corroboration. This design implements documentation rules rather than a numerical confidence score.

M03 Claim Specific Quality Gatespublic methods figure

M03 Claim Specific Quality Gates

This proposed gate matrix illustrates task dependence and requires specialist tailoring. A taxonomic task that depends on an absolute size criterion also requires physical calibration. A qualitative description still requires source identity and reviewer agreement about what is visible. We do not interpret this matrix as an empirically validated FUZZARIA scoring rule.

M04 Biological Unit Partitioningpublic methods figure

M04 Biological Unit Partitioning

We define partition boundaries at the unit required by the intended generalization claim. Repeated views of one specimen never cross partitions. A source-disjoint evaluation further holds out acquisition sources, and grouped host or site tests address their respective dependencies. This figure describes evaluation design, not achieved accuracy.

M05 Separate Validation Endpointspublic methods figure

M05 Separate Validation Endpoints

We evaluate detection, measurement, shape repeatability and taxonomic identification as separate endpoints. Human-reviewed references and appropriate units of independence govern each endpoint. A mask overlap statistic does not substitute for a diagnostic-character assessment.

E06 South Florida County Contextpublic geographic context

E06 South Florida County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Broward County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Broward County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Collier County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Collier County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Miami Dade County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Miami Dade County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Monroe County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Monroe County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Palm Beach County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Palm Beach County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Hendry County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Hendry County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Lee County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Lee County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map Martin County Contextpublic geographic context

Map Martin County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

Map St. Lucie County Contextpublic geographic context

Map St. Lucie County Context

County boundaries from U.S. Census Bureau (2025), 1:20,000,000 cartographic boundary file, NAD83 geographic coordinates. We show longitude and latitude with an aspect correction at 26 degrees north. We retain the separate four-county archival summary without inventing host locations. Generalized boundaries support regional context only and do not support area, distance or infection-risk inference.

S01 Raillietiella SEM Source Platepublic attributed reference

S01 Raillietiella SEM Source Plate

Published Raillietiella orientalis image from Sapion-Miranda et al. (2025), Figure 3, recovered from the supplied ESA presentation. AH denotes anterior hook, PH posterior hook, and PA cephalic papilla. We preserve source labels and pixels and apply only proportional resizing and SEPS page layout. This is comparative literature material, not a SEPS specimen. License: CC BY 4.0.

S02 Projected Distance Sensitivityresearch measurement with anatomical review pending

S02 Projected Distance Sensitivity

SEPS calculation from retained coordinates on Shamsi et al. (2020), Figure 2 panel F. The selected endpoints span 192.0521 pixels. A 140-pixel bar labeled 100 µm gives 137.1801 µm. Independent endpoint displacement radii of 3 pixels and bar-end displacements of 1 pixel yield scenario bounds of 131.0226–143.5160 µm. These are geometric sensitivity bounds, not confidence limits or validated anatomical dimensions. We do not reproduce an altered source montage.

E07 Positive Lizard Seriesauthor verification of aggregate transcription

E07 Positive Lizard Series

We transcribe the supplied ESA presentation: 20 positive Basiliscus vittatus with 33 parasites and two positive Anolis equestris with two parasites. These 22 positive lizards emerge from 27 autopsy entries, but the presentation does not establish a complete eligible examination denominator. We therefore report positive-series composition rather than host prevalence. The source reports developmental labels of four adults, nine immature forms and 22 unspecified forms; developmental labels do not establish host competence.

M06 Evidence Bundlepublic methods figure

M06 Evidence Bundle

A claim remains inspectable when every derivative points to its source. Identity: Host, collection event, lot, specimen and voucher links. Acquisition: Original image, checksum, preparation and optical context. Measurement: Source coordinates, scale, units, algorithm and uncertainty. Interpretation: Diagnostic characters, comparators, alternatives and reviewer. These are proposed documentation requirements, not measured system performance.

M07 Archive Plate Standardpublic methods figure

M07 Archive Plate Standard

Proposed archive plate specification under current SEPS:PRISM. Whole specimen: Unannotated overview with specimen identifier and verified scale. Diagnostic views: Separate calibrated structures with orientation and preparation. Annotation layer: Labels outside anatomy; every region linked to source coordinates. Caption and files: Authorship, acquisition, transformations, source license and claim status. These are proposed documentation requirements, not measured system performance.

M08 Fourier Workflowpublic methods figure

M08 Fourier Workflow

A numerical reconstruction cannot validate the anatomical choice of boundary. Reviewed polygon: Preserve source coordinates, closure, traversal and excluded artifacts. Arc length: Parameterize segments by length and integrate coefficients exactly. Reconstruction: Declare harmonic count and measure error against the chosen polygon. Comparison: Declare normalization; test orientation and repeat tracing before biology. These are proposed documentation requirements, not measured system performance.

M09 Claim Capspublic methods figure

M09 Claim Caps

FUZZARIA records why a task can or cannot support a particular conclusion. Visible appearance: Describe a documented feature without assigning unsupported identity. Measured character: Require relevant boundary, scale, units and uncertainty. Taxonomic comparison: Use diagnostic anatomy and authenticated comparative material. Final determination: Retain specialist decision, contradictions and unresolved alternatives. These are proposed documentation requirements, not measured system performance.

S03 Legacy SEM Overview Original Scalesource review; identity unresolved

S03 Legacy SEM Overview Original Scale

Legacy SEM overview recovered from SRC071, embedded image9.png. We retain the source 500 µm instrument scale and the pre-existing black region box. We apply only proportional resizing and external SEPS layout. The source filename described a trematode, but we do not independently establish its taxon or identify the region as an oral sucker. This plate replaces the conflicting added 200 µm annotation in SRC077. Original acquisition metadata and specimen linkage remain required.

S04 Legacy SEM Calibration Correctionstechnical correction; no new anatomical measurement

S04 Legacy SEM Calibration Corrections

Direct inspection of SRC075, SRC077 and SRC079 reveals unverified added labels that conflict with the retained acquisition scales or lack a defensible pixel-to-scale derivation. The 1037.7 µm line spans a high-magnification surface view rather than a documented oral-sucker boundary. We retire these added measurements. We preserve the source records and recover the overview with its original 500 µm bar in S03. Different scale labels could be legitimate only when each bar has a correctly calculated pixel length; these overlays do not provide that traceability.

M01 SEPS PRISM ArchitectureTechnical methodology

M01 SEPS PRISM Architecture

SEPS:PRISM retains FieldView or direct import, TEGUMENT, HookFuse, task-specific candidate comparison, FUZZARIA and expert review. Evidence export preserves observations and interpretations separately. PARAPLEX adds downstream ecological analysis without replacing those components. This collection executes source ingestion, deterministic morphometry and descriptive ecological summaries; the diagram does not claim that every recognition or ecological model is implemented or validated. Each output retains its unit of observation, missing evidence and reporting scope.

C03 Reader Error CategoriesTechnical methodology

C03 Reader Error Categories

We transcribe every reported outcome category in Ma et al. (2025), Table 1. Nine reader-method category totals equal 50. Reader 3 MAF sums to 49; the black segment displays the arithmetic residual to 50 and does not invent a clinical outcome. Discrepant assignments and additional-coccidian reports explain the other gaps left by agreement, false-negative and false-positive counts alone. Repeated evaluations share specimen identities. UV means ultraviolet wet-mount microscopy and MAF means modified acid-fast staining. The source percentages use all 50 specimens, not class-conditional denominators.

P01 Host by Recorded Parasite GroupSource-linked descriptive analysis

P01 Host by Recorded Parasite Group

The matrix preserves three documentary states for 81 source-local reptile host identifiers. Blue records a positive source label. Orange records a host row that explicitly says none, without certifying group-specific examination completeness. Pale cells contain no record for that group and remain unknown in ecological inference. Groups aggregate source terminology and do not represent species. We apply no image post-effects.

P02 Recorded Group CountsSource-linked descriptive analysis

P02 Recorded Group Counts

Left counts distinct source-local hosts with at least one record in each broad group. Right sums explicitly numeric or unambiguously additive counts across source rows. The sums describe the ledger, not independently verified numbers of unique parasites. Approximate counts, an open quantity and a missing cyst count remain separate. Reused vial identifiers and overlapping recovery records may affect individual totals; the supplied collision table identifies those cases.

P03 Documented Codetection CountsSource-linked descriptive analysis

P03 Documented Codetection Counts

Each off-diagonal cell counts host identifiers with positive source records in both groups; the diagonal counts hosts with that group. We compute C = B transpose B for a documentary positive-record indicator B. Unrecorded taxa do not supply biological negatives. We therefore estimate neither odds ratios nor transmission edges from this matrix. Repeated records within a host contribute only once to group presence.

P04 Temporal Record CoverageSource-linked descriptive analysis

P04 Temporal Record Coverage

Year-specific counts derive from the date field in the main reptile section. The workbook contains no main-series records for 2020. NCX-H025 has six different date values within 2021, so we retain that conflict and use only its consistent calendar year here. The 2024 identification follow-up uses a different date meaning and does not enter this plot. No equal sampling effort, seasonality or population trend is assumed.

P05 Identification Link ReconciliationSource-linked descriptive analysis

P05 Identification Link Reconciliation

We normalize MBH and MBHarvey prefixes only to propose sample-key matches. We retain raw identifiers. A consistent candidate agrees on the normalized host spelling and recorded count; it does not establish a confirmed specimen link. Host-label conflicts, count mismatches and unmatched BaVi20 references remain unresolved. We do not transfer the reported M. ingens identification into the primary ledger or count the follow-up material again.