MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of IgY antibodies in chickens and IgG in rabbits immunized against proteins of Pythium insidiosum isolated from horses in the state of Rio de Janeiro

2010· article· en· W2156834884 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Fabíola Nunes Rangel, Luciana da Silva Lemos, Cláudia Maria Costa de Almeida, Lério Gama Sales, Olney Vieira‐da‐Motta

Bibliographic record

VenuePesquisa Veterinária Brasileira · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicInfectious Diseases and Mycology
Canadian institutionsOuranos
FundersFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroUniversity of Alabama
KeywordsPolyclonal antibodiesAntibodyBiologyWestern blotMicrobiologyPathogenPythiumVirologyVeterinary medicineImmunologyMedicineBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pythiosis is caused by Pythium insidiosum and the occurrence of disease in horses was described in the North and Northwest State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The disease was described in cattle, sheep, humans, and horses in different states and regions across the country. This paper describes the development of IgY and IgG polyclonal antibodies, in chicken and rabbits, respectively against proteins extracted from kunkers and hyphae of P. insidiosum from affected horses. The proteins were recognized by chicken, rabbit and horse antibodies by immunodiffusion and Western blot against majority bands of 27 and 43 KDa, and titrated by ELISA. The antibodies IgY developed by the first time against Brazilian strains of P. insidiosum may represent a valuable tool in the detection of antigens of the pathogen and contribute to further studies aimed at immunotherapy and knowledge about this disease in endemic areas in Rio de Janeiro and in Brazil.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePesquisa Veterinária BrasileiraSame topicInfectious Diseases and MycologyFrench-language works237,207