MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111550226

Parasites causing disease in wild and cultured fish in Newfoundland.

2009· article· en· W2111550226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. A. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueSkemman · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrichodinaBiologyGadusMyxozoaZoologyRainbow troutFisheryMyxosporeaParasite hostingOutbreakGadidaeMyxobolusSwim bladderSalvelinusAquatic animalTroutAtlantic codFish <Actinopterygii>Gill
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study, based on field and laboratory observations, investigated the role of parasites as the cause of disease outbreaks and mass mortality in wild and cultured fish in Newfoundland over three decades. One ciliated protozoan, Trichodina jadranica (Ciliophora), and Loma branchialis (Microspora) were responsible for mass mortality of cultured fry and fingerling Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) while a myxozoan, Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae, and plerocercoids of a cestode, Diphyllobothrium dendriticum, caused a die-off of hatchery-reared Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) respectively after transfer to outdoor cages. A hematophagous copepod, Lernaeocera branchialis, was associated with mortality of wild Atlantic cod both in the laboratory and possibly in the field. One additional parasite, a coccidian, Goussia caseosa, caused lesions in the swim bladder of the roughhead grenadier, Macrourus berglax, a deep-sea fish. It is surmised that parasites have played a major role in mortality of both wild and cultured fish in New-foundland. Recommendations are made to prevent potential die-offs in cultured fish.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSkemmanSame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207