Consistent detection of bovine papillomavirus in lesions, intact skin and peripheral blood mononuclear cells of horses affected by hoof canker
Bibliographic record
Abstract
REASONS FOR PERFORMING THE STUDY: Equine hoof canker is a chronic proliferative pododermatitis of as yet unknown aetiology. Like equine sarcoid disease, canker is a therapy-resistant disorder characterised by hyperkeratosis, acanthosis and a marked tendency to recur. HYPOTHESIS: There is an association of sarcoid-inducing bovine papillomaviruses of types 1 and 2 (BPV-1, BPV-2) with hoof canker disease. METHODS: Using PCR-based techniques, we assessed canker tissue, intact skin and/or peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of 25 canker-affected horses for the presence of sarcoid-associated BPV-1 and -2. RESULTS: Conventional PCR revealed BPV-1/-2 DNA in 24/24 canker, 12/13 skin and 10/11 PBMC DNA isolates. Using inverse PCR, full-length BPV episomes were detected in 1/5 canker specimens. Sequencing of viral early and late genes amplified from canker, intact skin and PBMC DNA of 2 cases revealed an overall identity of 98% to BPV-1. Viral DNA loads amounted to ≤16 copies per cell in canker tissue and intact skin, and to ≤0.35 copies per PBMC, as determined by quantitative PCR. Using RT-PCR, the viral major oncogene E5 was shown to be transcribed in 2/4 canker tissue specimens and 5/7 PBMC isolates. Immunocapture PCR from 7 canker and 6 skin extract supernatants revealed capsomere-associated viral DNA in one canker and one skin sample. Hoof tissue, skin and PBMCs collected from 13 individuals with no signs of canker or BPV-related malignancies scored negative throughout the experiments. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the observed presence of BPV-1/-2 in canker-affected horses is not coincidental but indicative of an active contribution to hoof canker disease. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The use of antivirals and/or immune modulators may help improving canker therapy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".