Identification of novel murine parvovirus strains by epidemiological analysis of naturally infected mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Random-source DNA samples obtained from naturally infected laboratory mice (n=381) were evaluated by PCR and RFLP analysis to determine the prevalence of murine parvovirus strains circulating in contemporary laboratory mouse colonies. Mouse parvovirus (MPV) was detected in 77% of samples, Minute virus of mice (MVM) was detected in 16% of samples and both MVM and MPV were detected in 7% of samples. MVMm, a strain recently isolated from clinically ill NOD-mu chain knockout mice, was detected in 91% of MVM-positive samples, with the Cutter strain of MVM (MVMc) detected in the remaining samples. The prototypic and immunosuppressive strains of MVM were not detected in any of the samples. MPV-1 was detected in 78% of the MPV-positive samples and two newly identified murine parvoviruses, tentatively named MPV-2 and MPV-3, were detected in 21 and 1% of the samples, respectively. The DNA sequence encompassing coding regions of the viral genome and the predicted protein sequences for MVMm, MPV-2 and MPV-3 were determined and compared with those of other rodent parvovirus strains and LuIII parvovirus. The genomic organization for the newly identified viral strains was similar to that of other rodent parvoviruses, and nucleotide sequence identities indicated that MVMm was most similar to MVMc (96.1%), MPV-3 was most similar to hamster parvovirus (HaPV) (98.1%) and MPV-2 was most similar to MPV-1 (95.3%). The genetic similarity of MPV-3 and HaPV suggests that HaPV epizootics in hamsters may result from cross-species transmission, with mice as the natural rodent host for this 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".