Antibodies to Influenza A Virus in Wild Birds across Mongolia, 2006–2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wild waterbirds sampled July 2006-September 2009 in Mongolia were tested for antibodies to avian influenza (AI) virus with the use of a commercially available blocking enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Antibodies were detected in 25% (572/2,282) of tested birds representing 26 species, and all antibody-positive samples were from 12 species in the orders Anseriformes and Charadriiformes. The highest antibody prevalence was in Ruddy Shelducks (Tadorna ferruginea; 61.7%; n=261; 95% confidence interval [CI] 55.8-67.6%), Whooper Swans (Cygnus cygnus; 38.4%; n=242; 95% CI 32.3-44.5%), Swan Geese (Anser cygnoides; 15%; n=127; 95% CI 8.6-21.4%), Bar-headed Geese (Anser indicus; 13%; n=738; 95% CI 10.3-15.1%), and Mongolian Gulls (Larus mongolicus; 3.9%; n=255; 95% CI 1.3-6.5%). There was no significant temporal or spatial variation in the presence of antibodies in the sampled species. However, Bar-headed Geese and Mongolian Gulls showed spatial variation in antibody prevalence in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Our study provides insights into the hatch year waterbirds' exposure to AI virus at their natal and molting sites in Mongolia.
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".