Association Between Cellulitis (Enlarged Sternal Bursa) and Focal Ulcerative Dermatitis in Ontario Turkeys at the Time of Processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a processing plant survey to determine the prevalence of cellulitis (enlarged sternal bursa) and focal ulcerative dermatitis (FUD) in Ontario turkeys during the summer and to establish whether the two conditions were associated. A total of 11,772 birds from 24 different farms were observed at three processing plants in Ontario between June and August 2001. Each bird was examined for the presence of cellulitis and FUD. The severity and location of lesions were also noted. The overall prevalence of severe cellulitis (requiring either extensive trimming or condemnation of the bird) was 8.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.7, 10.9) and the overall prevalence for FUD was 22.6% (19.3, 25.9). The Pearson correlation coefficient between the prevalences of the two lesions was 0.56 (P = 0.0043), suggesting farms with a high prevalence of FUD in their birds also had a high prevalence of cellulitis. More specifically, birds with FUD were, on average, 10.8 times more likely to have cellulitis than birds without FUD (Mantel-Haenszel summary odds ratio = 10.8; 95% CI = 9.5, 12.3). Our observations suggest FUD may predispose birds to cellulitis, in which case, preventing FUD may reduce the occurrence of cellulitis condemnations in turkeys.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 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".