Vector potential of the salmon louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis in the transmission of infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To better understand the role of vector transmission of aquatic viruses, we established an in vivo virus-parasite challenge specifically to address (1) whether Lepeophtheirus salmonis can acquire infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) after water bath exposure or via parasitizing infected Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and if so, define the duration of this association and (2) whether L. salmonis can transmit IHNV to naive Atlantic salmon and whether this transmission requires attachment to the host. Salmon lice which were water bath-exposed to 1 x 10(5) plaque-forming units (pfu) ml(-1) of IHNV for 1 h acquired the virus (2.1 x 10(4) pfu g(-1)) and remained IHNV-positive for 24 h post exposure. After parasitizing IHNV-infected hosts (viral titer in fish mucus 3.3 x 10(4) pfu ml(-1)) salmon lice acquired IHNV (3.4 x 10(3) pfu g(-1)) and remained virus-positive for 12 h. IHNV-positive salmon lice generated through water bath exposure or after parasitizing infected Atlantic salmon successfully transmitted IHNV, resulting in 76.5 and 86.6% of the exposed Atlantic salmon testing positive for IHNV, respectively. In a second experiment, only salmon lice that became IHNV-positive through water bath exposure transmitted IHNV to 20% of the naive fish, and no virus was transmitted when IHNV-infected salmon lice were cohabitated but restrained from attaching to naive fish. Under laboratory conditions, adult L. salmonis can acquire IHNV and transmit it to naive Atlantic salmon through parasitism. However, the ephemeral association of IHNV with L. salmonis indicates that the salmon louse act as a mechanical rather than a biological vector or reservoir.
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".