Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Viruses Recovered from Ontario Farms, 1998–2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From January 1998 to July 2000, 2,456 clinical samples, including lung, tonsil, lymph node, and serum, from 760 cases submitted to the Animal Health Laboratory, Ontario, Canada, were tested for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome viruses (PRRSV) using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and RT-PCR product restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis. A total of 516 samples from 284 cases were RT-PCR positive for the PRRSV open reading frame (ORF) 7 sequence. The RT-PCR RFLP typing assay was performed using 2 different sets of primers, amplifying 716 or 933 base pairs of ORF 4, 5, and 6 of PRRSV. Samples from 254 cases were typeable, yielding 34 different RFLP types. Of these, 164 cases had 32 different RFLP types of field or intermediate strains, 86 had a pattern similar to a commercial PRRSV vaccine or VR 2332 strain of the virus, 4 had a RFLP type shared by another commercial vaccine and a field strain. In 4 cases, 2 different RFLP types were identified from tissues from different pigs that were submitted at the same time from the same farm. Of the 195 farms that submitted PRRSV PCR-positive samples, 48 submitted samples on more than 1 occasion during the specified time frame. In 23 of those 48 farms, RFLP patterns of PRRSV differed between submissions, whereas in the other 25 farms, the RFLP pattern remained unchanged. There were 34 different PRRSV patterns identified from 236 cases using the primer set amplifying 716 base pairs of PRRSV. There were 18 cases, consisting of 9 different patterns, typeable only by using the primers amplifying a 933-base pair fragment of the 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 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".