Comparison of assays for the detection of West Nile virus antibodies in chicken serum.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six tests for the detection of West Nile virus (WNV) antibodies in the serum of experimentally infected chickens were compared. The tests included the hemagglutination-inhibition test (HIT), immunoglobulin M (IgM)-capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with WNV-infected mouse brain antigen, immunoglobulin G (IgG) indirect ELISA with tickborne encephalitis viral antigen, the microtitre virus neutralization test, the standard plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT), and the microtitre PRNT (micro-PRNT). Thirty adult chickens, intravenously and intramuscularly inoculated with 10(7) plaque-forming units (PFU) of WNV strain Egypt 101, were bled and given a booster of 10(7) PFU at 7,15, and 21 d postinoculation; the final blood collection was on day 28. Although the micro-PRNT is capable of detecting the highest antibody titres during both early and late infection, because of the technical complexity and time requirements of this test a combination of IgM and IgG ELISAs is recommended for serologic screening. Serum samples that give positive results in the ELISAs can then be tested by the micro-PRNT to determine the specificity of antibodies to WNV.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".