MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739762576 · doi:10.3354/dao03158

Myxobolus arcticus and Parvicapsula minibicornis infections in sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka following downstream migration in British Columbia

2017· article· en· W2739762576 on OpenAlexaffabout
AM Mahony, SC Johnson, CM Neville, M. E. Thiess

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of Aquatic Organisms · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyxozoan Parasites in Aquatic Species
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusBiologyFisheryEnzooticMyxobolusEcologySalmonidaeContext (archaeology)Fish <Actinopterygii>SalmoGill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Factors influencing the health of sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka in British Columbia, Canada, are important for fisheries management and conservation. Juvenile salmon originating from the Fraser River were screened for 3 enzootic parasites (Myxobolus arcticus, Parvicapsula minibicornis, Ceratonova shasta) and the bacterium Renibacterium salmoninarum. Fish were collected from the Strait of Georgia in 2010, 2011 and 2012 and genotyped to stock of origin. Trends in infection status were estimated by year, spawning zone and catch area. The annual prevalences of P. minibicornis (n = 1448) were 23.3, 6.5 and 8.1%, and for M. arcticus (n = 1343), annual prevalences were 40.4, 66.3 and 27.4%, respectively. Logistic regression showed that P. minibicornis was most strongly associated with salmon from the lower Fraser River spawning zone and increased with distance caught from the mouth of the Fraser River. In contrast, infection with M. arcticus was most strongly associated with salmon from the middle Fraser River spawning zone, and there was no trend related to distance from the Fraser River. Neither R. salmoninarum nor C. shasta were detected. These observations are discussed in the context of salmon life history and pathogen biology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of Aquatic OrganismsSame topicMyxozoan Parasites in Aquatic SpeciesFrench-language works237,207