Molecular Study of Free-ranging Mule Deer and White-tailed Deer from British Columbia, Canada, for Evidence of Anaplasma spp. and Ehrlichia spp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-three free-ranging white-tailed deer (WTD; Odocoileus virginianus) and six mule deer (MD; Odocoileus hemionus) from south-central British Columbia, Canada, were tested for Anaplasma marginale by msp5 gene-specific PCR and Ehrlichia spp. by 16S rRNA or citrate synthase (gltA) gene-specific PCR, as well as by PCR with universal 16S rRNA primers detecting a wide range of bacteria. No deer tested positive for A. marginale. Amplification with universal 16S rRNA primers followed by sequencing of cloned fragments detected an Anaplasma sp. in one of 23 (4.3%) WTD and six of six (100%) MD and Bartonella sp. in four of 23 (17.4%) WTD. The Anaplasma sp. was genetically distinct from A. marginale and all other recognized members of the genus. Four of six (66.7%) MD and 0 of 23 (0%) WTD were Ehrlichia positive by PCR with primers for 16S rRNA and gltA genes. The sequences of gltA PCR fragments were identical to each other and to the respective region of the gltA gene of an Ehrlichia sp. which we detected previously in naturally infected cattle from the same area, suggesting the possibility of biological transmission of this rickettsia between cattle and wild cervids. Antibodies reactive with the MSP5 protein of A. marginale were detected using a competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in two of six (33.3%) MD, but not in WTD. The two seropositive MD were PCR positive for both the Anaplasma sp. and Ehrlichia sp. detected in this study, suggesting a reaction of antibodies against one or both of these rickettsias with the MSP5 antigen.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".