MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196065173 · doi:10.3390/ani11082426

Annual Recurrences of Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Epizootics in Age 0 Pacific Herring Clupea pallasii Valenciennes, 1847

2021· article· en· W3196065173 on OpenAlexaff
Paul K. Hershberger, Theodore R. Meyers, Jacob L. Gregg, Maya L. Groner, Sophie Hall, Hiruni T. Jayasekera, A. H. MacKenzie, Abigail S. Neat, Ella N. Piatt, Kyle A. Garver

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Virus Infections Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersExxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council
KeywordsPacific herringClupeaOutbreakJuvenileHerringBiologyVirologyZoologyFisheryEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout a 20 year biosurveillance period, viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus was isolated in low titers from only 6/7355 opportunistically sampled adult Pacific herring, reflecting the typical endemic phase of the disease when the virus persists covertly. However, more focused surveillance efforts identified the presence of disease hot spots occurring among juvenile life history stages from certain nearshore habitats. These outbreaks sometimes recurred annually in the same temporal and spatial patterns and were characterized by infection prevalence as high as 96%. Longitudinal sampling indicated that some epizootics were relatively transient, represented by positive samples on a single sampling date, and others were more protracted, with positive samples occurring throughout the first 10 weeks of the juvenile life history phase. These results indicate that viral hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS) epizootics in free-ranging Pacific herring C. pallasii are more common than previously appreciated; however, they are easily overlooked if biosurveillance efforts are not designed around times and locations with high disease potential.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicAnimal Virus Infections StudiesFrench-language works237,207