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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".