Replication, Pathogenicity, Shedding, and Transmission of Zaire ebolavirus in Pigs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: (See the editorial commentary by Bausch, on pages 179-81.) BACKGROUND: Reston ebolavirus was recently detected in pigs in the Philippines. Specific antibodies were found in pig farmers, indicating exposure to the virus. This important observation raises the possibility that pigs may be susceptible to Ebola virus infection, including from other species, such as Zaire ebolavirus (ZEBOV), and can transmit to other susceptible hosts. METHODS: This study investigated whether ZEBOV, a species commonly reemerging in central Africa, can replicate and induce disease in pigs and can be transmitted to naive animals. Domesticated Landrace pigs were challenged through mucosal exposure with a total of 1 ×10(6) plaque-forming units of ZEBOV and monitored for virus replication, shedding, and pathogenesis. Using similar conditions, virus transmission from infected to naive animals was evaluated in a second set of pigs. RESULTS: Following mucosal exposure, pigs replicated ZEBOV to high titers (reaching 10(7) median tissue culture infective doses/mL), mainly in the respiratory tract, and developed severe lung pathology. Shedding from the oronasal mucosa was detected for up to 14 days after infection, and transmission was confirmed in all naive pigs cohabiting with inoculated animals. CONCLUSIONS: These results shed light on the susceptibility of pigs to ZEBOV infection and identify an unexpected site of virus amplification and shedding linked to transmission of infectious virus.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".