Field and laboratory transmission studies of haemic neoplasia in the soft‐shell clam, <i>Mya arenaria</i>, from Atlantic Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A two-year laboratory and field study was initiated in 2001 in response to mass mortalities associated with haemic neoplasia (HN) in 1999 in Prince Edward Island (PEI) soft-shell clams, Mya arenaria. A laboratory proximity experiment (cohabitation) and an inoculation challenge were conducted with clams and mussels (Mytilus edulis). Three field exposure experiments were also conducted, in which naive clams were held in sediment (in trays) or out of sediment (in mesh bags) at three high HN prevalence sites on PEI. There was a conversion to HN positive in clams in the proximity experiment and in clams injected with whole blood and cell-free homogenate, but not at statistically significant levels. No mussels or control clams became HN positive. There was a significant conversion to HN positive in as little as 24 and 58 days after transfer with clams held out of sediment and in sediment, respectively. The laboratory and field experiments' results suggest that HN-infected clams are spreading the disease through water from infected clams to naïve individuals and via transplantation from affected to unaffected sites. Some environmental conditions (e.g. abnormally high water temperature and hypoxia-induced sea lettuce [Ulva lacteus] invasion) may make clams susceptible to infections or exacerbate the proliferation of HN.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".