Detection of Anti‐ <i>Brucella</i> Antibodies in Llama ( <i>Lama glama</i> )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seven llamas were immunized with killed Brucella abortus S1119.3 cells and bled sequentially, resulting in 64 samples. An eighth llama was kept as a negative control. In addition, 299 llama and 2075 alpaca sera, submitted for diagnostic testing, were included. Sera from all llamas were tested by the buffered antigen plate agglutination test, the complement fixation test, and the indirect enzyme immunoassays using smooth and rough lipopolysaccharides. A competitive enzyme immunoassay and fluorescence polarization assays were also performed. The sensitivity values for llama sera ranged from 92.2% to 100% and the specificity values from 89.6% to 100%. No alpacas were immunized. The specificity values for alpaca sera ranged from 94.8% to 100% specific although some sera gave an 'agglutination like' reaction after about 10 minutes of incubation. The complement fixation test could not be used, as 31% of the sera were anticomplementary and 4% were false positive.
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".