Monitoring the prevalence of the parasitic dinoflagellate Hematodinium sp. in snow crabs Chionoecetes opilio from Conception Bay, Newfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bitter crab disease (BCD) of snow crabs Chionoecetes opilio is caused by a parasitic dinoflagellate, Hematodinium sp. In Newfoundland's commercial fishery, infected snow crabs are identified using visual, macroscopic signs of disease for separation prior to processing. We estimated the sensitivity and specificity of gross, macroscopic diagnosis of Hematodinium sp. by comparing these results with microscopic examination of prepared hemolymph smears. The sensitivity of a diagnostic test is the probability that the test will yield a positive result given that the animal has the disease. The specificity is the probability of a negative result given the animal is not diseased. In October 1998, we conducted a design-based survey using cluster sampling in 2 strata. Over 10 000 snow crabs from pot and trawl surveys were examined macroscopically for BCD. In addition, over 350 crabs were randomly examined microscopically for disease. The double sampling resulted in an estimated sensitivity of 52.7% and an estimated specificity of 100%. That is, a positive result from macroscopic examination is definitive, if the observer is well trained, but macroscopic examination will fail to detect infections in crabs with borderline clinical signs of disease. The prevalence estimated from macroscopic observations (p(st) = 2.24%) was corrected for misclassification by dividing p(st) by the estimated sensitivity (0.527), giving a corrected estimate of 4.25%. The use of double sampling provides for efficient estimation of prevalence in that large numbers of crabs can be quickly examined for gross signs of infection and the results corrected for misclassification based on a limited number of observations with a better, but time-consuming test. In addition, the prevalence of macroscopically infected male crabs was lower in a trap survey (0.57%) compared to a trawl survey (1.59%). In the trawl survey, female crabs had a significantly higher prevalence of macroscopically diagnosed infections than males (6.34%). The prevalence of BCD has shown an alarming increase since it was first detected in Newfoundland during the early 1990s. Transmission and mortality studies are warranted to better understand the effect of the disease on its commercially important host.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".