MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W851143947 · doi:10.3354/dao02873

Specific PCR for Myxobolus arcticus SSU rDNA in juvenile sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka from British Columbia, Canada

2015· article· en· W851143947 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amelia A. M. Mahony, Sarah K Fraser, DB Groman

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of Aquatic Organisms · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMyxozoan Parasites in Aquatic Species
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeFisheries and Oceans CanadaOregon State University
KeywordsOncorhynchusBiologyParasite hostingJuvenileMyxobolusZoologyEcologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Gill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A PCR for the specific detection of the salmon brain parasite Myxobolus arcticus (Pugachev and Khokhlov, 1979) was developed using primers designed to amplify a 1363 base pair fragment of the small subunit rDNA. The assay did not amplify DNA from 5 other Myxobolus species or from 7 other myxozoan species belonging to 5 other genera. For juvenile sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka (Walbaum) collected from Chilko Lake, British Columbia (BC), Canada, in 2011, the prevalence by PCR was 96%, in contrast to 71% by histological examination of brain tissue. In 2010, the histological prevalence was 52.5%. Sequence identity between M. arcticus from Chilko Lake and other sites in BC ranged from 99.7 to 99.8% and was 99.6% for a Japanese sequence. In contrast, an M. arcticus sequence from Norway shared 95.3% identity with the Chilko Lake sequence, suggesting misidentification of the parasite. Chilko Lake sockeye salmon were previously reported free of infection with M. arcticus, and more research is required to understand the processes involved in the local and global dispersion of this parasite.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of Aquatic OrganismsSame topicMyxozoan Parasites in Aquatic SpeciesFrench-language works237,207