Effects of Cecropin Transgenesis and Interspecific Hybridization on the Resistance to <i>Ichthyophthirius multifiliis</i> in Channel Catfish and Female Channel Catfish × Male Blue Catfish Hybrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The resistance of Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus, hybrid catfish (female Channel Catfish × male Blue Catfish I. furcatus [CB hybrids]), and Channel Catfish and hybrid catfish expressing the introduced cecropin B gene to Ichthyophthirius multifiliis infestation was investigated in two experiments. In experiment I, four fingerling groups were challenged, including cecropin-transgenic Channel Catfish, cecropin-transgenic CB hybrids, non-transgenic Channel Catfish, and non-transgenic CB hybrids. Non-transgenic Channel Catfish survived for a shorter time than the other three groups. Survival rate was significantly different between non-transgenic Channel Catfish and the other groups, which had similar survival rates. In experiment II, non-transgenic CB hybrids had a less severe infestation than non-transgenic Channel Catfish. Mortality rates were 62.4% and 40.2% for non-transgenic Channel Catfish and CB hybrids, respectively. The mean survival time for non-transgenic hybrids was significantly longer (>5 d) than that of non-transgenic Channel Catfish. The results suggest that genetic enhancement of Ichthyophthirius resistance can be accomplished in Channel Catfish by either cecropin transgenesis or interspecific hybridization. In addition to survival rate, improving survival time is important because the extension of survival time provides greater opportunity to apply treatments to stop the protozoan infestation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".