MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096183242 · doi:10.1099/vir.0.83568-0

Peripheral blood mononuclear cells represent a reservoir of bovine papillomavirus DNA in sarcoid-affected equines

2008· article· en· W2096183242 on OpenAlexaff
Sabine Brandt, Rhea Haralambus, Angelika Schoster, Reinhard Kirnbauer, Christian Stanek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of General Virology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVeterinary Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeripheral blood mononuclear cellBiologyVirologyVirusBovine papillomavirusGenePathogenesisDNAPolymerase chain reactionImmunologyGenomeIn vitroGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bovine papillomaviruses of types 1 and 2 (BPV-1 and -2) chiefly contribute to equine sarcoid pathogenesis. However, the mode of virus transmission and the presence of latent infections are largely unknown. This study established a PCR protocol allowing detection of ≤10 copies of the BPV-1/-2 genes E5 and L1. Subsequent screening of peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) DNA derived from horses with and without BPV-1/2-induced skin lesions demonstrated the exclusive presence of E5, but not L1, in PBMCs of BPV-1/2-infected equines. To validate this result, a blind PCR was performed from enciphered PBMC DNA derived from 66 horses, revealing E5 in the PBMCs of three individuals with confirmed sarcoids, whereas the remaining 63 sarcoid-free animals were negative for this gene. L1 could not be detected in any PBMC DNA, suggesting either deletion or interruption of this gene in PBMCs of BPV-1/-2-infected equines. These results support the hypothesis that PBMCs may serve as host cells for BPV-1/-2 DNA and contribute to virus latency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations90
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of General VirologySame topicVeterinary Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207