Detection of Brucella sp. and Leptospira sp. in dogs using conventional polymerase chain reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The study was conducted to detect Brucella sp. and Leptospira sp. in blood samples of dogs in Isfahan and Shahrekord province in Iran. A total of 94 blood samples were collected from dogs of different breed, age, sex, and dogs’ type (stray or nonstray). The samples were examined using conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Fourteen (14.89%) dogs were positive for Brucella sp. and 18 (19.15%). dogs for Leptospira sp. There were no significant differences between the prevalence of the pathogens, provinces, sex, and age groups (P > 0.05). However, there was a statistically significant difference in prevalence of Brucella sp. and Leptospira sp. between stray and non-stray dogs (P < 0.0001; χ2 = 30.3767). The study also demonstrated that PCR was successfully used for the first time in Iran for the detection of Brucella sp. and Leptospira sp. in blood samples of dogs. Therefore, we recommend the PCR as a supplementary method with other commonly recognised methods (e.g. serological methods) for the diagnosis of subclinical infections with the microorganisms. Strict measures for the control of stray dogs are also highly recommended.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".