Occurrence of the Parasitic Copepod <i>Ergasilus labracis</i> on Threespine Sticklebacks from the South Coast of Newfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study conducted from August to October 2013 surveyed Threespine Sticklebacks Gasterosteus aculeatus (n = 822) for the presence of parasitic copepods in the vicinity of large sea-cage salmonid farms in Bay d'Espoir, Newfoundland. The majority of parasitic copepods surveyed were Ergasilus labracis (n = 4,684). Other parasitic copepods observed on Threespine Sticklebacks during the survey included chalimus-stage Lepeophtheirus spp. (n = 3), adult Argulus alosae (n = 2), and a single Thersitina gasterostei. This represents a new host record for E. labracis. The copepods were present on fish collected in a broad range of temperatures (6.9-17.7°C) and salinities (10.2-30.2 [Practical Salinity Scale]). The parasitic copepods were most commonly found on larger hosts estimated to be age 1 or older. Surprisingly, the highest infestations (approximately 65%) were found on regions of the hosts outside of the gills (behind the pectoral fins and pelvic spines); in some cases, the copepods had inflicted significant damage to the skin of their hosts. Among host fish with evidence of an additional infection, such as microsporidian tumors (xenomas) or hemorrhagic-like symptoms (dark red abdomens and bloody mucus), the prevalence of E. labracis was significantly higher (43.4%) than among healthy fish (28.9%) despite there being no significant difference in size between the two fish health groups. In contrast, intensity (mean number of individual parasites per host) was significantly higher among healthy hosts (23.6) than among unhealthy ones (7.63). Although this parasite has been listed as present in Newfoundland previously, it has a broad host range and has been reported to be pathogenic to farmed salmonids. Therefore, its potential impact on wild and farmed fish populations around Newfoundland should not be underestimated.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".