MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211221489 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2021.763206

Imperfect Estimation of Lepeophtheirus salmonis Abundance and Its Impact on Salmon Lice Treatment on Atlantic Salmon Farms

2021· article· en· W3211221489 on OpenAlexafffund
Jaewoon Jeong, Marit Stormoen, Krishna K. Thakur, Crawford W. Revie

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersOcean Frontier InstituteFiskeri - og havbruksnæringens forskningsfond
KeywordsLepeophtheirusAbundance (ecology)Sampling (signal processing)FisheryEstimationBiologyAbundance estimationStatisticsEcologyEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>AquacultureComputer scienceMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate monitoring of sea lice levels on salmon farms is critical to the efficient management of louse infestation, as decisions around whether and when to apply treatment depend on an estimation of abundance. However, as with all sampling, the estimated abundance of salmon lice through sampling salmon cannot perfectly represent the abundance on a given farm. While suggestions to improve the accuracy of lice abundance estimates have previously been made, the significance of the accuracy of such estimation has been poorly understood. Understanding the extent of error or bias in sample estimates can facilitate an assessment as to how influential this “imperfect” information will likely be on management decisions, and support methods to mitigate negative outcomes associated with such imperfect estimates. Here, we built a model of a hypothetical Atlantic salmon farm using ordinary differential equations and simulated salmon lice (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) abundance over an entire production cycle, during which salmon were periodically sampled using Monte Carlo approaches that adopted a variety of sample sizes, treatment thresholds, and sampling intervals. The model could thus track two instances of salmon lice abundance: true abundance (based on the underlying model) and monitored abundance (based on the values that could be estimated under different simulated sampling protocols). Treatments, which depend on monitored abundance, could be characterized as early, timely, or late, as a result of over-estimation, appropriate estimation, and under-estimation, respectively. To achieve timely treatment, it is important to delay treatments until true abundance equals some treatment threshold and to execute treatment as soon as this threshold is reached. Adopting larger sample sizes increased the frequency of timely treatments, largely by reducing the incidence of early treatments due to less variance in the monitored abundance. Changes in sampling interval and treatment threshold also influenced the accuracy of abundance estimates and thus the frequency of timely treatments. This study has implications for the manner in which fish should be sampled on salmon farms to ensure accurate salmon lice abundance estimates and consequently the effective application treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207