NEOSPORA CANINUM–LIKE OOCYSTS OBSERVED IN FECES OF FREE-RANGING RED FOXES (VULPES VULPES) AND COYOTES (CANIS LATRANS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the feces of free-ranging foxes and coyotes for the presence of Neospora caninum oocysts. Feces were collected from 271 foxes and 185 coyotes in the Canadian province of Prince Edward Island, processed by sucrose flotation, and examined by light microscopy for the presence of coccidian oocysts. In 2 fox and 2 coyote samples, oocysts morphologically and morphometrically similar to oocysts of N. caninum were observed. DNA was extracted from these samples and subjected to nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using primers to the N. caninum-specific Nc5 genomic sequence. Through DNA sequencing, alignment of the sequences of at least 3 clones from each isolate to sequences deposited in GenBank revealed 95-99% similarity to the Nc5 sequence of N. caninum. PCR using primers specific for Hammondia heydorni failed to yield an amplification product from these DNA samples.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".