Birds and bornaviruses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2008, avian bornaviruses (ABV) were identified as the cause of proventricular dilatation disease (PDD). PDD is a significant condition of captive parrots first identified in the late 1970s. ABV infection has subsequently been shown to be widespread in wild waterfowl across the United States and Canada where the virus infects 10-20% of some populations of ducks, geese and swans. In most cases birds appear to be healthy and unaffected by the presence of the virus; however, infection can also result in severe non-suppurative encephalitis and lesions similar to those seen in parrots with PDD. ABVs are genetically diverse with seven identified genotypes in parrots and one in canaries. A unique goose genotype (ABV-CG) predominates in waterfowl in Canada and the northern United States. ABV appears to be endemic in North American waterfowl, in comparison to what appears to be an emerging disease in parrots. It is not known whether ABV can spread between waterfowl and parrots. The discovery of ABV infection in North American waterfowl suggests that European waterfowl should be evaluated for the presence of ABV, and also as a possible reservoir species for Borna disease virus (BDV), a related neurotropic virus affecting horses and sheep in central Europe. Although investigations have suggested that BDV is likely derived from a wildlife reservoir, for which the shrew and water vole are currently prime candidates, we suggest that the existence of other mammalian and avian reservoirs should not be discounted.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".