Differences in <i>Ichthyophonus</i> prevalence and infection severity between upper Yukon River and Tanana River chinook salmon, <i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i> (Walbaum), stocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two genetically distinct populations of chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (Walbaum), were simultaneously sampled at the confluence of the Yukon and Tanana rivers in 2003. Upper Yukon-Canadian fish had significantly higher infection prevalence as well as more severe infections (higher parasite density in heart tissue) than the lower Yukon-Tanana River fish. Both populations had migrated the same distance from the mouth of the Yukon River at the time of sampling but had significantly different distances remaining to swim before reaching their respective spawning grounds. Multiple working hypotheses are proposed to explain the differences between the two stocks: (1) the two genetically distinct populations have different inherent resistance to infection, (2) genetically influenced differences in feeding behaviour resulted in temporal and/or spatial differences in exposure, (3) physiological differences resulting from different degrees of sexual maturity influenced the course of disease, and (4) the most severely infected Tanana River fish either died en route or fatigued and were unable to complete their migration to the Tanana River, thus leaving a population of apparently healthier 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".