Aplasia Cutis Congenita (Epitheliogenesis Imperfecta) in Swine: Observations from a Large Breeding Herd
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epitheliogenesis imperfecta has been reported in several animal species, and its inheritance is suspected to be autosomal recessive. This term has been used to describe two different diseases, namely epidermolysis bullosa and aplasia cutis congenita, which are both grossly characterized by an absence of epidermis or mucosal epithelium and are most frequently reported on the distal limbs and oral cavity. Epitheliogenesis imperfecta has been described in swine, but the literature on the subject is scarce. To better characterize this condition, 70 piglets with congenital skin defects macroscopically compatible with epitheliogenesis imperfecta were examined. In all but 1 case, only 1 piglet per litter was affected. Of the affected piglets, 65 (93%) were male, suggesting a sex-related problem. More than half of the piglets had multiple skin lesions. All defects were located on the caudal half of the body, and none was found in the oral cavity. Most lesions were characterized by an absence of epidermis and part of the dermis and adnexae. Adnexal dysplasia was also observed at several sites, both with and without epitheliogenesis imperfecta, suggesting a developmental problem. Fluid-filled, congenital subcutaneous bullae were noted grossly on 7 piglets; their relationship, if any, with epitheliogenesis imperfecta remains unknown. As the term epitheliogenesis imperfecta has been used in cases of epidermolysis bullosa, the term aplasia cutis congenita seems to be more appropriate to describe these lesions in swine.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".