Introduction to the Invited Review Series initiative of the Journal of Fish Diseases: Health Management of Zebrafish in Research Facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The editorial and management team of the Journal of Fish Diseases is pleased to introduce readers to a new initiative commencing with the publication of a peer-reviewed Invited Manuscript: “Review of diseases and health management in zebrafish Danio rerio (Hamilton 1822) in research facilities” by Kent et al., found within this issue of the JFD. The goal of the Invited Review Series is to engage with researchers who have made substantial contributions to the basic and translational advances pertaining to key fish health issues, with the idea of developing a publication which not only captures the depth and significance of existing science and any potential controversy on the reviewed topics but also explores how these findings will shape the direction of future studies. At the same time, we want to provide readers with expert reviews on a range of significant and emerging issues in the area of fish health. Reviews within this series, although invited, are peer reviewed in a manner identical to all other manuscripts submitted to the JFD. Aquaculture and fish health is a global activity and global concern, and we anticipate this will be reflected in the selection of articles comprising this series. Moreover, aquaculture and fish health is a highly diverse general topic and we anticipate therefore that the review articles will reflect this in their originality of structure and content. The fish health community that supports the JFD includes researchers in many disciplines, working on many different species, and derives from interests in all parts of the world. An opportunity to highlight significant programme accomplishments from inception to translation has motivated the editorial team to work with authors in developing this Invited Review Series, and we sincerely hope that it will be a useful contribution to scientists working in connected fields and also—more broadly—to interested readers hoping to become better informed about important topics in aquatic species disease and medicine. JFD authorship and readership are at the forefront of fish health sciences, and feedback on this Invited Review Series initiative is welcomed. The topic of the first review in this series, specifically aimed at examining disease conditions arising within a key fish species used in biomedical studies, seems especially relevant given the increasing use of zebrafish as model species in studies whose outcomes are providing foundations within basic sciences and translations to human and animal health. Cautionary notes regarding the effects of disease conditions within zebrafish colonies, potentially serving as confounding variables in studies, highlight the importance of fish health professionals, fish health management strategies and the need for ongoing research in this area.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".