Infectious agent release and Pacific salmon exposure at Atlantic salmon farms revealed by environmental DNA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential risk posed by infectious agents (IAs) associated with netpen aquaculture to wild fishes is determined based on the "release" of IAs from netpens into the environment, the "exposure" of the wild fish to those released agents, and the "consequence" for wild fish experiencing infection by those agents. Information available to characterize these three factors is often lacking, and the occurrence of transmission from aquaculture to wild fish as well as potential consequences of such transmission are difficult to observe. In this study, we utilized environmental DNA (eDNA) to characterize the release of dozens of IAs from, and exposure of Pacific salmon to, Atlantic salmon aquaculture. We combined these factors with the consequence of infection, as determined by the literature, to identify IAs that may pose a risk to wild salmon exposed to aquaculture in British Columbia, Canada. Over an 18-month period, eDNA samples were collected from seven active and four inactive netpen aquaculture sites in the Broughton Archipelago, BC. A meta-analytical mean across 22 IAs showed that the odds of IA detection at active sites was 4.3 (95% confidence interval = 2.3:8.1) times higher than at inactive sites, with 11 IAs in particular demonstrating a pattern consistent with elevated release. Oncorhynchus tshawytscha was the only Pacific salmon species presenting eDNA detections more likely to occur around and within active netpens relative to inactive sites. After considering the evidence of negative consequences of infection (from previous literature) in tandem with release model results, we determined that Tenacibaculum maritimum, Tenacibaculum finnmarkense, Ichthyobodo spp., and Piscine orthoreovirus are potential risks to Pacific salmon exposed to marine netpen aquaculture. These IAs, and others demonstrating patterns consistent with release but with insufficient prior research to evaluate the consequences of infection, require further studies that identify the factors influencing the intensity of release, the spatial extent of release around netpens, and the prevalence of infection in wild fish within known distances from netpens.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".