The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 13 of the 40 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Collection techniques for the analyses of pathogens in crustaceans
Open accessAbstract
Review of sampling and analytical methods for crustacean pathogens, including the value of visual and histological assessment alongside molecular diagnostics.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review surveys field and laboratory techniques for collecting, preserving, and diagnosing pathogens in crustaceans, from gross visual inspection through histology, electron microscopy, and molecular assays. It emphasizes that method choice, proper fixation, and disciplined data management determine whether disease surveys yield interpretable results.
Key findings
- Visual assessment is non-lethal and easily folded into fishery surveys, but its sensitivity varies: carapace discoloration in snow crabs detected only advanced *Hematodinium* infections and under-reported true prevalence by as much as 50%, though the sign was highly specific (Pestal et al., 2003).
- Incorporating disease data into long-running surveys can be powerful — a mark-recapture dataset spanning over 35 years showed epizootic shell disease significantly raised mortality in American lobsters and likely drove landings declines in Long Island Sound.
- Fixation quality is decisive: poorly fixed hepatopancreas (which autolyzes within 10–15 minutes post-mortem) can be undiagnosable, and tissue-to-fixative ratios should never fall below 1:10, with samples moved to preservative within 48–72 hours.
- Molecular tools give pathogen-specific presence/absence but little information on other organisms, and PCR assays developed for one region can produce false negatives elsewhere unless re-validated by sequencing; pooling samples is efficient at prevalences below 5%, while unequal pool sizes improve confidence intervals as prevalence approaches 10% or more.
Methods
- Narrative review synthesizing collection and diagnostic approaches for crustacean pathogens, drawing on published examples and the author's field and laboratory experience.
- Covers macroscopic/visual assessment, pleopodal staging, hemolymph smears and vital staining, agar isolation of bacteria, histology (fixatives, decalcification, embedding), transmission electron microscopy, and molecular methods (PCR, ISH, quantitative PCR), plus field sampling design and data management.
- Illustrated with case examples including the '100 Lobsters' project (a $2.3 million initiative sampling 100 lobsters for shared tissue analyses) and a sample data sheet used to track tissues, storage, and metadata.
Limitations
- The paper states no formal limitations of its own; it is a methodological overview rather than a systematic or quantitative review.
- Evident from the text: recommendations rest largely on the author's personal observations and selected case studies rather than a structured comparison of methods, and several practical points (e.g., container and fixative performance, flocculant formation in lipid-rich hemolymph) are attributed to unpublished data.
- The paper repeatedly notes that many techniques require advanced training and that diagnostic accuracy depends on proper preservation, so the guidance may not transfer directly to resource-limited field settings.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
13 of 40 cited sources checked · 4 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Neutral-buffered formalin, Z-fix®, and SafeFix® II are fixatives of choice for molecular applications, such as in situ hybridizations (e.g., Bruce et al. , 1993; Carnegie et al. , 2003; Li et al. , 2006; Small et al. , 2007)”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Bruce et al. , 1993 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper reports successful in situ hybridization in formalin/alcohol-fixed shrimp tissue (Abstract), supporting the general use of fixed tissue for this application. It does not identify that fixative as neutral-buffered formalin or discuss Z-fix® or SafeFix® II. The Discussion says that the effects of different fixatives still needed testing, so it does not establish any of the three as a fixative of choice. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Could not verifycites Carnegie et al. , 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Sample collection and histological processing section (page unavailable) says the oysters used for FISH were fixed in Davidson’s Solution. The supplied passages and searches for neutral-buffered formalin, Z-fix, SafeFix, and fixation provide no statement that the three named fixatives are preferred for molecular applications. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not matchedcites Li et al. , 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Validation includes sequencing samples to prove that the DNA from the pathogen of interest is being amplified appropriately (Claydon et al. , 2004; Burreson, 2008).”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Claydon et al. , 2004 source
In the Discussion, the authors recommend sequencing the 941 bp PCR amplicon to confirm WSSV detection. Their DNA sequencing results show why: amplicons that appeared positive had no significant nucleotide identity to WSSV. The source thus supports sequencing PCR products to check that the intended pathogen DNA was amplified. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites Burreson, 2008 source
In the section labeled “Published June 19,” the paper says sequencing amplification products can verify that the DNA comes from the target organism, supporting the claim about checking what PCR amplified. It distinguishes that check from confirming an actual infection, which requires further validation. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Wet-fixed smears give much better results (Fig. 4B).”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The hepatopancreas of crustaceans that have been dead for longer than 10-15 minutes rapidly degrade due to autolysis, so post-mortem changes can render this organ difficult to assess even after short periods.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“DAPI works particularly well for examining nuclear details for Hematodinium infections, because the nucleus of the parasite is often in a metaphase-like state, and the dye shows this character quite well.”
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hemolymph with high protein or lipid content, such as that from a female host undergoing oogenesis, can form flocculants in fixatives making cell densities difficult to estimate in fixed samples (JDS, unpubl. data).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“For certain diseases, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) is a critical diagnostic tool in support of field collections (e.g., Stentiford & Feist, 2005)”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stentiford & Feist, 2005 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of museum collections, the parasitic or pathogenic agents are often poorly fixed for preservation because they were not identified as such until the hosts have been examined in the laboratory.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Improved estimates of natural mortality were possible because of the field data on ESD.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Visual assessment is particularly effective when combined with other methods to verify the specificity of the condition as well as to account for the prevalence of subpatent infections.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 70
- It may state two separate claims as one. 45
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“after decalcification, lobster eyes can be safely halved with a single-edged razor blade (not a scalpel) with much less damage to the delicate support network holding the ommatidia in place (Maniscalco & Shields, 2007; Magel et al. , 2009; Shields et al. , 2012a).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Maniscalco & Shields, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Magel et al. , 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Materials and Methods (p. 3) says the eyes were decalcified and then cut in half with a razor blade; it describes using a scalpel to remove the eyes, not to halve them. It does not specify a single-edged blade or say that this method was safer or caused less damage to the tissue supporting the ommatidia. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not matchedcites Shields et al. , 2012a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The swimming leg, or fifth pereopod, of the blue crab, Callinectes sapidus Rathbun, 1896 has been evaluated for detecting Hematodinium infections in live juvenile crabs (Messick, 1994), but the method is not routinely used for this species and still requires a microscope for evaluation.”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Messick, 1994 source
The Materials and methods passage describes using the flattened fifth swimming appendage to detect Hematodinium in live, early-juvenile blue crabs with an inverted microscope. The citation is attached to that evaluation; the later statement about routine use is not attributed to Messick (1994). (LLM, conf=0.91)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Neutral red is taken up differentially by phagosomes within cells, and many protozoan parasites take up the dye, whereas host hemocytes (mainly granulocytes) show only a little uptake, and stray connective tissue cells have modest uptake.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chatton & Poisson, 1931
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Stentiford & Shields, 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Diagnosis of Hematodinium infections section (page unavailable) says Neutral Red enters the parasite’s lysosomes while host hemocytes acquire little stain. It does not identify phagosomes, specify granulocytes as the hemocytes involved, or report modest uptake by connective-tissue cells. Its staining observation concerns particular Hematodinium infections, not protozoan parasites generally; it also notes that Hematodinium from Nephrops norvegicus does not stain. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“High-throughput sequencing has been used in some situations to help identify a pathogen but it is not practical for use in most field or fishery applications (Hewson et al. , 2014).”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Hewson et al. , 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Investigation of Viral Agents in SSWD-Affected Tissues” (page unavailable), the paper describes using viral metagenomic sequencing to identify a candidate sea-star pathogen. It does not assess whether high-throughput sequencing is practical for field or fishery applications, so that part of the claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If an assay is to be used on samples from outside the parameters used for its development, then samples and parameters should be re-validated to avoid the possibility of false negatives (Carnegie et al. , 2016).”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Carnegie et al. , 2016 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3, “The paradox of advanced diagnostics” (page unavailable), says assay validation must establish that an assay performs as intended and determine which applications it suits. It does not specifically say to re-validate samples or parameters when testing outside those used in development, or link that step to avoiding false negatives. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Pathogens can for instance be present within or on a prospective host organism, but they may not necessarily be infecting that organism; hence, it is critical to confirm that the pathogen is indeed within the tissues of the host (Burreson, 2008).”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Burreson, 2008 source
In the main text (section labeled “Published June 19”; page not provided), Burreson explains that detecting pathogen DNA does not establish infection: a parasite must overcome host barriers and become established in cells, tissues, or organs. The same section calls for confirmation by histology, which visualizes the parasite in the host. (LLM, conf=0.91)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“More focused or biased collection of diseased animals is also important as it provides material for identification and documentation of the pathogen(s) and allow for the optimization of additional diagnostics (e.g., Pestal et al. , 2003; Shields et al. , 2005, 2007).”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Pestal et al. , 2003 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Sampling design and protocol section (page unavailable) says the researchers obtained hemolymph from every crab showing visible signs of infection, and the Sensitivity and specificity section reports confirmation of Hematodinium sp. and comparison of diagnostic preparations. This supports the paper as an example of targeted sampling for pathogen documentation and diagnostic evaluation, but it does not explicitly establish the broader claim that biased collection is important for those purposes. (LLM, conf=0.83)
- Not matchedcites Shields et al. , 2005, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Freshly collected tissue samples in RNAlater® can be stored for several months at -80º C for later gene expression studies (Beale et al. , 2008).”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Beale et al. , 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.2 reports that freshly sampled lobster tissues were stored in RNAlater, and section 2.5 describes their use for gene-expression analysis. But section 2.2 specifies −20°C, not −80°C, and gives no storage duration; it does not support the claim that samples can be kept for several months at −80°C. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This is crucial because many laboratories rely heavily on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods, which simply give presence or absence of a pathogen, and sometimes the primers are not designed or tested adequately to diagnose a pathogen correctly (Claydon et al. , 2004).”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Claydon et al. , 2004 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Discussion (page not provided) describe insufficient primer specificity in the OIE WSSV PCR test and false-positive results that could lead to misdiagnosis. The paper calls the protocol an international standard, but it does not establish that many laboratories rely heavily on PCR or characterize PCR methods generally as giving only pathogen presence or absence. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These dye preparations tend to form small crystals in buffer preparations and may need coarse filtration to remove them.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Infections were even categorized by their relative intensity in the host.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Janus green and fast green may provide some contrast to the nuclei of formalin-fixed cells with suitable results for some protozoans (JDS, pers. obs.).”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the hepatopancreas degrades very rapidly and is highly sensitive to weak fixation, poor buffering, and poor penetration of fixatives”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For small crustaceans such as copepods or small amphipods, no dissection may be necessary or small pin pricks may provide suitable entry points for fixation.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In practical experience, polypropylene containers reduce adherence of cells and higher ratios of fixative can help reduce clotting, but the type of plastic container and the type of fixative should be tested prior to use (JDS, unpubl. data).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Muscle and spongy connective tissues, however, can often provide useful information in post-mortem situations.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fluorochrome dyes also work well for ciliate infections, because their macro- and micronuclei can be visualized as well as dye uptake within the basal bodies of the kineties.”
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cells can adhere to the container used for fixation, they can clump due to handling, or the hemolymph constituents can form clots or precipitates with the fixatives, thus skewing the results or making the preparations difficult to assess.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It also facilitated the later distribution of tissue samples.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A significant advantage to macroscopic, or visual, diagnosis is that the method is not lethal and prevalence data can be readily incorporated into shipboard or field sampling protocols.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some specimens should, however, be fixed and preserved in 95% ethanol for later molecular identification and diagnostics.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sometimes field sampling requires fixing whole specimens. In such cases, large amphipods, small crabs (< 30 mm carapace width) and juvenile lobsters (< 30 mm carapace length) should be cut in half prior to fixation.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“an important feature of nearly all crustaceans is that their cuticle provides an impervious barrier to fixation; hence dissection is usually required to provide good penetration of the fixatives into the tissues of interest.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For heavily sclerotized pieces, such as eyestalks (Fig. 3C), sections of carapace, claw , and whole bodies, longer decalcification is necessary (overnight or > 12 h).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of the methods used in TEM can be difficult to employ, and tissues require tedious embedding in plastics as well as significant technical training in ultramicrotomy .”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Various techniques can be used to collect, identify, and monitor host populations for pathogens. These include classical methods, such as visual or histological assessment, to more refined techniques, such as simple and quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ratio of tissue to fixative is critical, and it should never be less than 1:10.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If fresh smears are unsuitable, prepared slides are relatively easy to make and provide a permanent record.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correct fixation of the tissues is one of the most important steps for proper diagnosis, because poor fixation can render tissues useless for histological assessment.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The choice of fixative is important because tissues have different requirements for appropriate fixation and preservation.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These methods can be used in the field and aboard ships, and the only significant problem is taking suitable safety precautions when transporting fixatives or using them in confined, poorly ventilated spaces.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For paraffin histology , pieces of tissue no larger than 10-20 mm in size are ideal, but larger sizes can be processed depending on the nature of the tissue.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Epifluorescence microscopy can be used to observe bacteria in moderate infections and special fluorochrome dyes can be used to enhance diagnoses of other pathogens as well (see below).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For larger specimens, a break in the cuticle is required for the proper penetration of the fixatives; even larger specimens, such as market-sized crabs or lobsters, must be dissected and their tissues placed directly into fixative.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cuticle, foregut, or gill preparations may also require a short decalcification period for proper sectioning, whereas gonads often require different fixatives as well as longer embedding times in paraffin.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Formalin is the fixative of choice for embryos because the pigments within the developing larvae are retained, whereas they are washed out with ethanol preservation.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Once embedded in paraffin or plastic, specimens no longer represent a chemical hazard and can be shipped safely and easily.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Lipid-rich tissues such as ovaries may require fixatives with good penetration, such as alcohol-formalin-acetic acid (AFA), longer paraffin infiltration times, or longer times in vacuum-assisted paraffin infiltration.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One problem with decalcification is that the reagents, particularly formic acid, can damage the integrity of nucleic acids, and thus interfere with in situ hybridization techniques, so decalcification times should be reduced if the technique is to be used.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The collection of preserved hemolymph samples can be adapted to field collections; however, there are some significant pitfalls to consider.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fixative must penetrate rapidly into the tissues to produce good results.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The crustacean cuticle presents a significant barrier to the histologist.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The etiology of the disease and its effect on the host population were unknown at that time (see Shields, 2013 for review).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shields, 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three issues are absolutely critical to proper fixation: appropriate dissection, correct choice of fixative, and a suitable fixation method that includes proper ratios of tissue to fixative.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sample area should be swabbed with 70-95% ethanol if possible to avoid potential contaminants such as ciliates or diatoms that are often found on the external surfaces.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SafeFix® II is easier to employ in field settings because it has less volatility .”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“A single good fixative for both paraffin histology and TEM is problematic, but 1G:4F (1 part glutaraldehyde to 4 parts formalin; Luna, 1968) has been used with mixed results in surveys of oyster diseases (e.g., Carver et al. , 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Luna, 1968
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Carver et al. , 2010 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A minimum ratio of 1 part tissue to 10 parts preservative is best for proper preservation.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Direct observation requires good photographic documentation at different magnifications for later reference; and this can be difficult aboard a ship or in rustic field conditions.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Air-dried smears of crustacean hemolymph should, however, be avoided if possible, because unlike mammalian blood smears, dried hemolymph introduces too many artifacts that can make interpretation difficult, particularly when looking for cytoplasmic inclusions or nuclear alterations.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fixatives employed in TEM are hazardous, particularly glutaraldehyde and osmium tetra-oxide.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Epifluorescence microscopy may also be useful for rapid diagnosis of pathogens.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In most cases, the agents must have pathognomonic signs of infection, which means that the macroscopic sign of infection is specific to the pathogen causing the disease.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For lightly sclerotized cuticles, such as gills and pleopods, short decalcification periods (3-6 hours) in decalcification fluid (e.g., the formic acid - sodium citrate method of Luna, 1968) may be all that is required.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Luna, 1968
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are several methods for collecting hemolymph from crustaceans, and these can be adapted easily for the study of different pathogens.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Storage periods should also be considered as some fixatives require refrigeration or additional post processing and cells can degrade or clump if held too long (i.e., longer than 1-2 weeks).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are two standard methods for preserving tissues for later molecular analysis: freezing specimens at -20º C or lower or preserving samples in 95% ethanol.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bouin's solution and Davidson's fixative are good general fixatives because they have good penetration into the tissues, prepare the tissue for histological stains, and give superior staining results with hematoxylin and eosin stains and other staining techniques.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Direct observation of wet smears is one of the easiest methods for observing pathogens in the hemolymph, but it does require advanced training to diagnose some agents, particularly parasitic dinoflagellates, amebae, and microsporidians.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Total hemocytes counts are relatively easy to quantify with a hemacytometer, but differential cell counts require training.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Steedman's ester wax method is a useful alternative embedding technique for tissues rich in lipids (Humason, 1979).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Humason, 1979
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In the case of fisheries collections, the etiological agents are typically unknown prior to an outbreak, and that can lead to poor preservation and identification of the proper agent (Shields, 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shields, 2012 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Many staining procedures can be adapted from standard histology texts (e.g., Luna 1968; Humason 1979) depending on specific pathogens and their staining attributes.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Luna 1968
- Not matchedcites Humason 1979
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Histological identification and assessment of diseases requires proper fixation and handling of the tissues of interest.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For work with microbial pathogens, hemolymph or other tissue samples can be adequately preserved by these methods, and the preservation can last many years.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the method has lost its prominence in many diagnostic laboratories, it still offers a powerful means of identifying microbial pathogens such as viral and rickettsial agents.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bouin's solution, however, has two significant limitations: picric acid can be difficult to work with in certain situations, because when it dries out it can form unstable crystals that are unstable and potentially explosive, and it hydrolyzes DNA more rapidly than other fixatives, making it less desirable for molecular-based in situ hybridization techniques”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The etiology of a disease is often unknown prior to these outbreaks and the effect of the pathogen on the host population is poorly understood.”
- Also stated in: § INTRODUCTION · p. 2 · plain
“In the case of fisheries collections, the etiological agents are typically unknown prior to an outbreak, and that can lead to poor preservation and identification of the proper agent (Shields, 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shields, 2012 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § INTRODUCTION · p. 2 · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A data sheet was developed prior to the work that served as a checklist to ensure that tissues and data were obtained for each animal entering the study (Fig. 5).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For expression or transcriptomic work, tissues should be stored routinely in fixatives such as RNAlater® (Thermo Fisher, Waltham, MA, USA) that allow gene expression studies (e.g., Hasson et al. , 1997).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hasson et al. , 1997 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One relatively straightforward means to sample large field collections is through randomization of host individuals.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The data sheet was vetted among research groups to include tissues of interest to all collaborators.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We routinely scan all data sheets and retain them in a 'cloud'-based storage service with photographic documentation of histological samples and field specimens.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Processed data files are stored similarly when they are completed, thus maintaining a coherent storage area for all of the data.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“For estimates of prevalence, it is important to have reasonable sample sizes and to minimize sample or collection biases (e.g., Gregory & Blackburn, 1991, Jovani & Tella, 2006, Shields et al. 2017).”
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Randomization can be as simple as sampling every other host or every x th host in a trap or trawl, with the caveat that the first host in the sample stream must be randomly selected.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although this may seem trivial, it can be difficult to implement and track data sets through time, particularly after the completion of the data collection component of a study .”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Part of the initiative included the '100 Lobsters' project in which one laboratory served as a central point for dissecting, distributing, and archiving tissues as well as for data storage (Shields et al. , 2012a, b).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shields et al. , 2012a, b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Sample data sheet from the '100 Lobsters' project used by laboratory personnel to facilitate tissue sampling, storage, shipment and receipt of samples (Shields et al. , 2012b).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shields et al. , 2012b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Simple pooling is efficient when prevalence is low (< 5%), and the lowest confidence intervals can be obtained from equal pool sizes (Litvak et al. , 1994; Williams & Moffitt, 2001).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Litvak et al. , 1994 source
- Not matchedcites Williams & Moffitt, 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For large studies, it is often necessary to assign several identification numbers to samples because of the different data generated by collaborators.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Prevalence can be biased by low sample sizes; hence, requisite sample sizes must be considered before beginning any field assessments of disease.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Most knowledge of crustacean pathogens and diseases has come from accidental discovery of discolored or misshapen hosts in museum collections, cryptic infections from unrelated studies, or natural outbreaks that killed commercially important hosts.
“Most of our knowledge of pathogens and diseases in crustaceans has come from the accidental discovery of discolored or misshapen hosts in museum collections, cryptic infections from unrelated studies, or from natural outbreaks that have killed commercially important hosts.”
The paper relies on this without support.
During fisheries outbreaks, managers typically collect dead hosts, which are very difficult to necropsy properly.
“During outbreaks in fisheries, managers typically collect dead hosts, which are very difficult to necropsy properly.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Live diseased or moribund hosts are typically culled at sea, leaving pathologists with few specimens for diagnostic studies.
“Live diseased or moribund hosts are typically culled at sea, leaving the pathologist with few specimens for diagnostic studies.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Crustacean pathogens are a diverse biota, and disparate pathogens require different methods for proper assessment and identification.
“Moreover, the pathogens of crustaceans represent a diverse biota, and disparate pathogens require different methods for proper assessment and identification.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most crustacean pathogens are specialists on Crustacea, and some, such as parasitic dinoflagellates and rhizocephalans, may be more difficult for non-specialists to identify.
“Although some of the pathogens of crustaceans have counterparts in well-studied vertebrates, such as Platyhelminthes, most are specialists on Crustacea, and thus may be more difficult for the non-specialist to identify, such as parasitic dinoflagellates and rhizocephalans.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Bacterial infections are ubiquitous in crustaceans.
“Bacterial infections are ubiquitous in crustaceans.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Histology remains a standard assessment tool for disease diagnosis in histopathology and disease assessment.
“Histology remains a standard assessment tool for disease diagnosis in histopathology and disease assessment.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Histology provides information on the state of host tissues, the etiology of disease, the level of infection, and pathological alterations of affected tissues.
“It provides information on the state of the host tissues, the etiology of disease, the level of infection, and pathological alterations of affected tissues.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Molecular methods are now routine for disease diagnosis.
“Molecular methods are now routine for disease diagnosis.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Molecular tools are valuable for establishing the presence of a pathogen.
“Molecular tools are valuable for establishing the presence of a pathogen, but they do require interpretation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Field collections often carry substantial environmental or collection data that is valuable for assessing the ecology of hosts and their diseases.
“Field collections often have a veritable 'boat load' of environmental or collection data that adds to the complexity and wealth of information needed to assess the ecology of the hosts and their diseases.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Durliat and Vranckx citation has a different year from its reference
MinorThe preservation discussion cites Durliat and Vranckx as 1989, while the corresponding reference is dated 1981.
“(see Söderhäll & Smith, 1983; Durliat & Vranckx, 1989)”
“Durliat, M. & Vranckx, R. 1981. Action of various anticoagulants on hemolymph of lobsters and spiny lobsters.”
Maniscalco and Shields citation has a different year from its reference
MinorThe discussion cites this work as 2007, but the corresponding reference lists it as 2006.
“(Maniscalco & Shields, 2007; Magel et al. , 2009; Shields et al. , 2012a)”
“Maniscalco, A.M. & Shields, J.D. 2006. Histopathology of idiopathic lesions in the eyes of Homarus americanus from Long Island Sound.”
Citations
Cites
von Linné, C., Gmelin, J. F., & Beer, G. E. (1767) · Biodiversity Heritage Library (Smithsonian Institution) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.156765 · Cited by 4,925
(1968) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,924
Humason, G. L. (1962) · W.H. Freeman eBooks · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.5890 · Cited by 3,657
Milne-Edwards, H. (1834) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.39738 · Cited by 689
Söderhäll, K., & Smith, V. J. (1983) · Developmental & Comparative Immunology · doi:10.1016/0145-305x(83)90004-6 · Cited by 649
Adams, J. R., & Bonami, J. R. (2017) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781315149929 · Cited by 351
Densovirus associated with sea-star wasting disease and mass mortality
Hewson, I., Button, J. B., Gudenkauf, B. M., Miner, B., Newton, A. L., Gaydos, J. K., Wynne, J., Groves, C. L., Hendler, G., Murray, M., et al. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1416625111 · Cited by 314
Stentiford, G., & Shields, J. (2005) · Diseases of Aquatic Organisms · doi:10.3354/dao066047 · Cited by 244
Self-citationParasite prevalence and sample size: misconceptions and solutions
Jovani, R., & Tella, J. L. (2006) · Trends in Parasitology · doi:10.1016/j.pt.2006.02.011 · Cited by 191
Rathbun, M. J. (1896) · Proceedings of the United States National Museum · doi:10.5479/si.00963801.18-1070.349 · Cited by 176
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- 2000, Prevalence and progression of shell disease in American lobster, Homarus americanus, from Rhode Island waters and the offshore canyons, Journal of Shellfish Research, 19, 691
- 1931, Sur l’existance, dans le sang des crabes, de péridiniens parasites Hematodinium perezi n.g., n.sp. (Syndinidae), Comptes Rendus des Séances de l’Societé biologique de Paris, 105, 553
- 1788, Beskrivelse over den store Gronlandske krabbe, Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab Skrivter, Nye Samling, 3, 181
- 1985, The prevalence of the rhizocephalan Briarosaccus callosus Boschma, a parasite in blue king crabs, Paralithodes platypus (Brandt), of southeastern Alaska
- 2005, Status of shell disease in Long Island Sound, 106
- 1891, Crustacea from the northern coast of Yucatan, the harbor of Vera Cruz, the west coast of Florida and the Bermuda Islands, Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 43, 176
- 2005, Prevalence and severity of shell disease in American lobster Homarus americanus from eastern Long Island Sound, Connecticut, 94
- 1804, Des Langoustes du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Annales du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle (Paris), 3, 388
- 1820, Galatéadées, 49
- 2002, A survey for prevalence of Paramoeba spp. in blue crabs along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, 56, 105
- 1853, Mémoire sur la famille des Ocypodides. Suite (1). Deuxiéme Tribu Principale, Annales des Sciences Naturelles, séries 3, 20, 163
- 2007, 77, 61
- 1990, Some implications of egg mortality caused by symbiotic nemerteans for data acquisition and management strategies of the red king crab. Proceedings of the International Symposium on King and Tanner Crabs, November 28–30, 1989. Anchorage, Alaska, pp. 397–402. Alaska Sea Grant College Program Report No. 90-04
- 2015, Parasites and pathogens of Brachyura, 639
- 2005, Epizootic shell disease in the American lobster, Homarus americanus, 2
- 1815, De Cancris Camtschaticis, Oniscis, Entomostracis et Cancellis marinis microscopicis noctilucentibus, Cum tabulis IV: Aneaeis et appendice adnexo de Acaris et Ricinis Camtschaticis. Auctore Tilesio. Conventui exhibuit die 3 Februarii 1813, Mémoires de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences de Saint-Pétersbourg, 5, 331
- 2001, A critique of methods of sampling and reporting pathogens in populations of fish, Journal of Aquatic Animal Health, 12, 300
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shields, J. D. (2019) · Journal of Crustacean Biology · doi:10.1093/jcbiol/ruz072 · Cited by 94
“Although it may not fully explain the increase in transmission, this pattern in molting in relation to disease was revealed from analysis of fishery-independent monitoring data, which allowed for the examination of large-scale patterns in this system (Shields, 2017).”
ResultSelf-citationCarella, F., Palić, D., Šarić, T., Župan, I., Gorgoglione, B., Prado, P., Andree, K. B., Giantsis, I. Α., Michaelidis, B., Lattos, A., et al. (2023) · Veterinary Pathology · doi:10.1177/03009858231186737 · Cited by 45
Ross, E. P., Behringer, D. C., Muñoz, A., Diaz, D. D., & Bojko, J. (2019) · Journal of Invertebrate Pathology · doi:10.1016/j.jip.2019.03.001 · Cited by 19
Small, H. J., Huchín-Mian, J. P., Reece, K. S., Lohan, K. M. P., Butler, M., & Shields, J. D. (2019) · Diseases of Aquatic Organisms · doi:10.3354/dao03371 · Cited by 16
Self-citationCrandall, G. A., Jensen, P. C., White, S. J., et al. (2022) · Marine Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s10126-022-10100-8 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Shields, J. D.
- Affiliations
- William & Mary (US)
- Corresponding author
- Shields, Jeffrey D
- ORCID
- Shields, Jeffrey D
- Venue
- Journal of Crustacean Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2017-09-18
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 753-763
- ISSN
- 0278-0372 (ISSN-L)
- 1937-240X
- OpenAlex
- W2754989366
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 0.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Crustacean Biology (publishedVersion)
- W&M Publish (College of William & Mary) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0929086, 0723662)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Aquaculture disease management and microbiota
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Crustacean biology and ecology
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Parasite Biology and Host Interactions
- Keywords
- crustacean pathogens, outbreak, disease surveillance, histological evaluation, visual assessment, etiology, crustacean diseases
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-30, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-30 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review