MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081170422 · doi:10.3354/dao040131

Experimental and natural host specificity of Loma salmonae (Microsporidia)

2000· article· en· W2081170422 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ross W. Shaw, ML Kent, Christopher M. Whipps, Martin L. Adamson

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of Aquatic Organisms · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSalvelinusOncorhynchusSalmoChinook windBiologyBrown troutSalmonidaeArctic charTroutFontinalisZoologyParasite hostingFisheryHost (biology)EcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The microsporidian Loma salmonae (Putz, Hoffman & Dunbar, 1965) Morrison & Sprague, 1981 has caused significant gill disease in Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp. Host specificity of the parasite was examined experimentally by per os challenge of selected salmonids and non-salmonids with infective chinook salmon O. tshawytscha gill material. Pink Oncorhynchus gorbuscha and chum salmon O. keta, brown Salmo trutta and brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis, and chinook salmon (controls) were positive, whereas Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and Arctic char Salvelinus alpinus were negative. In addition, no non-salmonids were susceptible to experimental exposure. Wild Pacific salmon species in British Columbia, Canada, were examined for L. salmonae during their freshwater life history stages (smolts, prespawning, spawning). All stages were infected, although infections in smolts were only detectable using a L. salmonae-specific PCR test. Many previous Loma spp. described from Oncorhychus spp. are likely L. salmonae based on host, parasite morphology, and site of infection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of Aquatic OrganismsSame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207