Avian influenza: the Canadian experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reports of sporadic avian influenza outbreaks involving domestic poultry date back to the 1960s. With the exception of A/turkey/Ontario/7732/1966 (H5N9), which was isolated from a turkey breeding establishment, all viruses characterised prior to 2004 fit the criteria of low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI). Only in retrospect was A/turkey/Ontario/7732/1966 shown to meet the criteria of a highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). In 2004, Canada reported its first case of HPAI to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). The outbreak, which began in a broiler breeder farm in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia, involved an H7N3 LPAI virus which underwent a sudden virulence shift to HPAI. More than 17 million birds were culled and CAN$380 million in gross economic costs incurred before the outbreak was eventually brought under control. In its aftermath a number of changes were implemented to mitigate the impact of any future HPAI outbreaks. These changes involved various aspects of avian influenza detection and control, including self-quarantine, biosecurity, surveillance, and laboratory testing. In 2005, a national surveillance programme for influenza A viruses in wild birds was initiated. Results of this survey provided evidence for wild birds as the likely source of an H5N2 LPAI outbreak that occurred in domestic ducks in the Fraser Valley in the autumn of 2005. Wild birds were once again implicated in an H7N3 HPAI outbreak involving a broiler breeder operation in Saskatchewan in 2007. Fortunately, both of these outbreaks were limited in extent, a consequence of some of the changes implemented in response to the 2004 British Columbia outbreak.
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 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".