MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148266943 · doi:10.1603/033.046.0332

Surveillance of Mosquito-Borne Viruses in Alberta Using Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction With Generic Primers

2009· article· en· W2148266943 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kanti Pabbaraju, Kevin Ho, Sallene Wong, Julie D. Fox, Brynn Kaplen, Shaun Tyler, Michael Drebot, Peter Tilley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Entomology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaUniversity of CalgaryProvincial Laboratory of Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyBunyaviridaeVirologyArbovirusOrthobunyavirusFlavivirusFlaviviridaePolymerase chain reactionTogaviridaeVirusAlphavirusTaqManViral diseaseGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mosquitoes collected during 2003, 2004, and 2005 in Alberta, Canada, were screened for the presence of a wide range of arboviruses by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Nucleic acid extracts from mosquito slurries were amplified using universal primers designed to detect viruses belonging to the Flavivirus genus of the Flaviviridae family and California and Bunyamwera serogroups of the Bunyavirus genus within the Bunyaviridae family. Species-specific detection of Western equine encephalitis virus and Eastern equine encephalitis virus was also performed. Amplified products were analyzed, and the viral target was identified by sequencing. Of the 418 pools tested, 3 pools contained Cache Valley virus belonging to Bunyaviridae and 103 pools were positive for a previously undescribed flaviviral sequence that was most similar to Kamiti River virus. These data suggest that nucleic acid amplification using broadly reactive primers can be adopted for arbovirus surveillance in mosquito populations, and this approach has the potential to detect both previously recognized and novel viruses.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations35
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EntomologySame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207