Cattle Can Develop Immunity to Paralysis Caused by<i>Dermacentor andersoni</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cattle exposed to a paralyzing strain of Dermacentor andersoni (Stiles) were all paralyzed during an initial exposure, but the incidence of paralysis decreased to 17 and 0% after two subsequent exposures to virulent flat ticks. Cattle with a single exposure to paralyzing ticks became paralyzed when challenged with ticks that had been prefed on cattle. Western blots indicated that cattle developed antibody responses to 13 antigens in paralyzing tick saliva. The likelihood of paralysis was inversely related to the number of saliva proteins that cattle developed antibody responses to. Cattle challenged with prefed ticks developed antibody response to fewer saliva antigens than cattle challenged with flat ticks. Variation in tick dose did not influence the expression of paralysis. Daily survival of ticks was similar on all groups of cattle, and tick weight was not reduced on previously challenged cattle, indicating immunity developed to the paralysis toxin rather than tick feeding. Four saliva antigens (molecular weights ranging from 36.9 to 42.2 kDa) were associated with the development of immunity to paralysis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".