MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168739311 · doi:10.1177/104063871102300234

Fatal Hepatic Sarcocystosis in a Captive Black Bear ( <i>Ursus Americanus</i> ) Associated with <i>Sarcocystis Canis</i> -Like Infection

2011· article· en· W2168739311 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Davies, Gary J. Haldorson, Daniel S. Bradway, Ann P. Britton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicToxoplasma gondii Research Studies
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrsusSarcocystosisSarcocystisCanisZoologyBiologyEquidaeLabrador RetrieverPathologyVeterinary medicineMedicineParasite hostingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fatal hepatic sarcocystosis was diagnosed in a 13-year-old captive black bear (Ursus americanus) with a history of acute onset of vomiting, polyuria, polydipsia, and bilirubinuria. Gross lesions included severe icterus, multisystemic hemorrhage, and gall bladder edema. The most significant microscopic lesion was severe necrotizing hepatitis with intralesional protozoa that reproduced by endopolygeny consistent with a Sarcocystis spp. Infrequent microglial nodules were randomly scattered within the white matter of the cerebral cortices, thalamus, and brainstem, but intralesional protozoal schizonts were not observed. In the liver, immunohistochemistry was positive for Sarcocystis spp. and negative for Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora spp. Positive staining was not observed in the brain. Genus-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of the 18S ribosomal RNA gene was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sections of liver and brain; in both tissues, PCR was positive for Sarcocystis spp. Sequence analysis of the PCR amplicons revealed 100% identity to the published sequences of Sarcocystis canis and Sarcocystis arctosi.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations14
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic InvestigationSame topicToxoplasma gondii Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207