MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889791288 · doi:10.26036/cnphis0002039

Lepeophtheirus salmonis Atlantic Canada genome sequencing project

2016· dataset· en· W6889791288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueChina National GeneBank DataBase · 2016
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLepeophtheirusParasite hostingSalmoPopulationSalmonidaeAquatic animal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Atlantic) has become an important model for the study of ectoparasitic infestations on salmon. The process of disease due to L. salmonis on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and sea trout (S. trutta) is a result of their feeding behavior and the secretion of bioactive compounds into the host. Clinical signs include physical damage to the epidermis and underlying tissue, changes in the blood electrolyte composition, physiological stress, immune dysfunction, loss of locomotive capacity and sometimes, death. Innate resistance to the salmon louse varies among the various species of salmon and trout. In addition, the question arises as to whether separate Atlantic and Pacific populations of L. salmonis have co-evolved with Atlantic salmon and Pacific salmon respectively. Recent data suggests that the Pacific Ocean population may be a distinct group from the Atlantic Ocean population. The salmon louse, Lepeophtheirus salmonis, is a common parasite of the skin of farmed and wild salmon throughout the northern hemisphere. In farming, the parasite is important because of production losses and significant costs of treatment. Furthermore, the salmon louse is notable for the debates that disease is transmitted between farmed and iconic wild salmon populations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.010

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChina National GeneBank DataBaseFrench-language works237,207