MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W157528506

Experimental transmission of bovine anaplasmosis (caused by Anaplasma marginale) by means of Dermacentor variabilis and D. andersoni (Ixodidae) collected in western Canada.

2007· article· en· W157528506 on OpenAlexaffabout
Murray W. Lankester, W. Brad Scandrett, Elizabeth J Golsteyn-Thomas, Neil C Chilton, Alvin A. Gajadhar

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsCanadian Food Inspection Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDermacentor variabilisBiologyAnaplasmosisTickIxodidaeVeterinary medicineDermacentorIxodesVirology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian cattle are free of bovine anaplasmosis, with the exception of 4 isolated incursions since 1968, which were eradicated. It is not known why the disease has not become established in regions of Canada adjacent to the United States where it is endemic. To assess the vector competence of wild-caught ticks in cattle-rearing regions, Dermacentor variabilis and D. andersoni were collected in western Canada and fed on calves experimentally infected with Anaplasma marginale (St. Maries strain). The 2 tick species were equally competent in transmitting A. marginale to splenectomized calves, all 15 tick-exposed calves becoming infected. The prepatent periods in 13 calves ranged from 18 to 26 d and did not vary in relation to the numbers of ticks fed or the duration of transmission feedings. The unusually long prepatent periods in 2 calves (45 and 55 d) were probably due to concomitant Eperythrozoon infection. This study clearly demonstrated that tick species present in western Canada are competent vectors of bovine anaplasmosis. Potential barriers, including climate, must be considered in developing strategies to prevent A. marginale from becoming established in anaplasmosis-free regions.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207