MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412488909 · doi:10.1111/jfd.70028

<scp> <i>Saprolegnia parasitica</i> S1 </scp> and <scp>S2</scp> Strains Differ in Zoospore Transition Timing and Pathogenicity Against Juvenile Atlantic Salmon ( <scp> <i>Salmo salar</i> </scp> )

2025· article· en· W4412488909 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Duston, Nasif Sarowar, Tyler Schmidt‐Schaun, Tess Astatkie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAquaculture disease management and microbiota
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZoosporeBiologyIncubationSaprolegniaSalmoVirulenceGerminationJuvenileMotilityNova scotiaMicrobiologyBotanyFish <Actinopterygii>SporeFisheryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S1 and S2 strains of S. parasitica are both common among diseased farmed salmonids in Nova Scotia, whereas globally S1 is rare and S2 is common. Following the initiation of asexual maturation and overnight incubation at 20°C then harvest, and incubation at 10°C in vitro, S2 secondary zoospores mostly transformed into cysts within 3 h, and by 6 h post-harvest > 80% had germinated. S1 zoospores, by contrast, exhibited persistent motility; at > 30 h post-harvest > 80% were in the motile stage, and < 10% were either cysts or germlings. The disease challenge test began with skin disruption by shaking pairs of fish in a net for 15 s, then stocking six fish in up to 12 aquaria (27 L water), addition of 400 zoospores/ml, held in static water for 11 h, then 10°C flow-through. Through smolting (January-June) at 10°C, S1 was consistently more virulent than S2 (p = 0.005), with gross disease signs evident among 50% of test fish in 40 h for S1 versus 72 h for S2. Susceptibility to disease was independent of smolt status (p = 0.512). Secondary motile zoospores, cysts, or germling stages of both strains all caused disease, but S2 germlings were the least pathogenic.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish DiseasesSame topicAquaculture disease management and microbiotaFrench-language works237,207