MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157050557 · doi:10.1637/8387-063008-case.1

An Outbreak of West Nile Virus Infection in Captive Lesser Scaup (Aythya affinis) Ducklings

2009· article· en· W2157050557 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chelsea G. Himsworth, Kirsty E. B. Gurney, Aleksija Neimanis, Gary A. Wobeser, F. A. Leighton

Bibliographic record

VenueAvian Diseases · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAythyaBiologyOutbreakWest Nile virusVirologyVirusZoologyVeterinary medicineEcologyWaterfowl

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report describes West Nile virus (WNV)-associated mortality in captive lesser scaup (Aythya affinis) ducklings that occurred in Saskatchewan, Canada, in July and August 2007. There were no clinical signs or gross necropsy findings suggestive of the cause of death; however, microscopic lesions were consistent with WNV infection, including nonsuppurative encephalitis and myocardial, pancreatic, and splenic necrosis. Necrosis of the thymus and thyroid was also observed in some birds, which has not previously been reported in association with WNV infection. Immunohistochemistry revealed WNV antigen in multiple tissues, including thymus and thyroid, and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction resulted in the identification of WNV gene sequence in all of the ducklings that were tested. This outbreak is of interest because waterfowl (Anseriformes) are not thought to be particularly susceptible to WNV, and there is little information about WNV infection in prefledging birds. The apparent susceptibility of lesser scaup to WNV demonstrated in this study may have implications for declining lesser scaup populations in the wild.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAvian DiseasesSame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207