MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Porcine Circovirus 2 Replication in Colostrum‐deprived Piglets Following Experimental Infection and Immune Stimulation Using A Modified Live Vaccine against Porcine Respiratory and Reproductive Syndrome Virus

2007· article· en· W2062451822 on OpenAlexaff
Gordon Allan, Andrea Caprioli, I. McNair, P. Lagan‐Tregaskis, John Ellis, Steven Krakowka, John McKillen, Fabio Ostanello, F. McNeilly

Bibliographic record

VenueZoonoses and Public Health · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Virus Infections Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPorcine circovirusVirologyImmune systemColostrumPorcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virusWasting SyndromeBiologyCircovirusVirusImmunologyAntibodyMedicineWasting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) infection is now recognized as the major factor in the development of post-weaning multisystemic wasting syndrome (PMWS). Although Koch's postulates have been fulfilled for PCV2 and PMWS, the severe clinical expression of the disease observed in field cases has been difficult to reproduce experimentally. Some studies have demonstrated that immune stimulation associated with the use of some commercially available swine vaccines may trigger progression of PCV2 infection to disease and lesions characteristic of PMWS. Here we describe the effects on PCV2 infection in an experimental model following the use of a commercially available modified live vaccine to porcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virus (PRRSV). Although none of the piglets infected with PCV2 developed clinical PMWS, the severity of microscopical lesions and the PCV2 antigen load associated with these lesions were higher in the PRRSV-vaccinated piglets compared with those detected in the PCV2 only infected animals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoonoses and Public HealthSame topicAnimal Virus Infections StudiesFrench-language works237,207