Use of agent‐based modelling to predict benefits of cleaner fish in controlling sea lice, <i><scp>L</scp>epeophtheirus salmonis</i>, infestations on farmed <scp>A</scp>tlantic salmon, <i>Salmo salar</i> L.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sea lice, Lepeophtheirus salmonis, are ectoparasites of farmed and wild salmonids. Infestations can result in significant morbidity and mortality of hosts in addition to being costly to control. Integrated pest management programmes have been developed to manage infestations, and in some salmon farming areas, these programmes include the use of wrasse. Wrasse prey upon the parasitic life stages of L. salmonis and can be stocked on farms at varying densities. Despite considerable variation in the usage of wrasse, there are few quantitative estimates of how well they can control sea lice and how best to optimize their use. To explore at what densities wrasse should be stocked in order to meet specific control targets, we built an individual-based model that simulates sea lice infestation patterns on a representative salmonid host. Sea lice can be controlled through the use of chemical treatments as well as by wrasse predators. We found that the wrasse can effectively control sea lice, and the densities of wrasse needed for effective control depend upon the source of the infestation and the targeted level of control. Effective usage of wrasse can result in decreased use of chemical treatments and improved control of sea lice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".