Piscine reovirus in wild and farmed salmonids in <scp>B</scp>ritish <scp>C</scp>olumbia, <scp>C</scp>anada: 1974–2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Piscine reovirus (PRV) was common among wild and farmed salmonids in British Columbia, western Canada, from 1987 to 2013. Salmonid tissues tested for PRV by real-time rRT-PCR included sections from archived paraffin blocks from 1974 to 2008 (n = 363) and fresh-frozen hearts from 2013 (n = 916). The earliest PRV-positive sample was from a wild-source steelhead trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum), from 1977. By histopathology (n = 404), no fish had lesions diagnostic for heart and skeletal muscle inflammation (HSMI). In some groups, lymphohistiocytic endocarditis affected a greater proportion of fish with PRV than fish without PRV, but the range of Ct values among affected fish was within the range of Ct values among unaffected fish. Also, fish with the lowest PRV Ct values (18.4-21.7) lacked endocarditis or any other consistent lesion. From 1987 to 1994, the proportion of PRV positives was not significantly different between farmed Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. (44% of 48), and wild-source salmonids (31% of 45). In 2013, the proportion of PRV positives was not significantly different between wild coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch (Walbaum), sampled from British Columbia (5.0% of 60) or the reference region, Alaska, USA (10% of 58).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".