Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four juvenile male wolves (Canis lupus) each received an oral dose of 1.6-1.7 x 10(12) colony-forming units of Brucella abortus biovar 1 isolated from a bison (Bison bison) in Wood Buffalo National Park (Canada), and two others served as negative controls. Infected wolves did not show clinical signs of disease but did develop high Brucella antibody titers. Small numbers of B. abortus were excreted sporadically in feces until day 50 postinoculation (PI). Very small numbers of the bacterium were isolated from urine of only one wolf late on the same day that it was infected, and very small numbers of colonies of B. abortus were obtained from buccal swabs of three wolves for up to 48 hr PI. Two infected wolves euthanized 6 mo after the start of the experiment had no lesions, and colonies of B. abortus were isolated from thymus and most major lymph nodes. The other two infected wolves euthanized 12 mo after the start of the experiment had no lesions, and smaller numbers of brucellae were recovered from fewer lymph nodes compared with the wolves killed 6 mo earlier. The sporadic excretion of very small numbers of brucellae by the wolves was insignificant when compared with the infective dose for cattle. Brucella abortus, brucellosis, Canis lupus, pathogenesis, serology, wolf.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".