MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125457350 · doi:10.1177/0300985811415705

Acantholytic Folliculitis and Epidermitis Associated With <i>Staphylococcus hyicus</i> in a Line of White Leghorn Laying Chickens

2011· article· en· W2125457350 on OpenAlexaff
Sonia Chénier, L. Lallier

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Pathology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutoimmune Bullous Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)Ministère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyKeratinPathologyHyperkeratosisFolliculitisFeatherEpidermis (zoology)EpitheliumAnatomyMedicineZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several mature Leghorn-type hens with the same genetic background experienced skin and feather problems in a breeder flock. There was almost-total feather loss on the head and neck, as well as thickened, scaly skin, and follicular ostia were plugged with keratin debris. Other individuals exhibited prominent subcutaneous nodules multifocally on the head. Histologic examination of the skin revealed a severe hyperplasia of follicular epithelium with hyperkeratosis and cystic dilation. Numerous clefts and vesicles were detected along the epidermis and follicular epithelium, some containing acantholytic keratinocytes. A mild heterophilic inflammation was associated with these lesions, and few gram-positive cocci were present in the keratin plugs. Bacterial culture of the skin yielded a variable amount of Staphylococcus hyicus. Immunochemistry looking for chicken IgY revealed no intercellular staining in the epidermis or follicular epithelium. All these findings supported a diagnosis of Staphylococcus-associated acantholytic epidermitis and folliculitis. This case suggests that S. hyicus could be a significant pathogen in poultry production. The close genetic relationship among affected individuals could indicate a hereditary predisposition in this line of White Leghorn laying chickens.

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)0.000
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary PathologySame topicAutoimmune Bullous Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207