MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172430325 · doi:10.1637/7208-051804r

Evidence of Avian Pneumovirus Spread Beyond Minnesota Among Wild and Domestic Birds in Central North America

2004· article· en· W2172430325 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard S. Bennett, Jill Nezworski, Binu T. Velayudhan, Κ. V. Nagaraja, David Zeman, N. W. Dyer, Tanya Graham, Dale Lauer, M. Kariuki Njenga, David A. Halvorson

Bibliographic record

VenueAvian Diseases · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlockSeroprevalenceBiologyVeterinary medicineVirologyAntibodySerologyEcologyImmunologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To detect avian pneumovirus (APV) in central North America, nasal turbinates or choanal deft tissues from domestic turkeys and wild birds were examined for the presence of APV RNA by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), whereas serum samples from domestic turkeys were analyzed for APV antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). In 2002, the seroprevalence of disease in domestic turkeys in Minnesota remained high (42.3% of the flocks). In addition, there is evidence the disease has spread to turkey flocks in North Dakota (8.2%), South Dakota (7%), Iowa (10%), and Wisconsin (8.6%) as detected by RT-PCR and/or ELISA. House sparrows and ring-billed gulls sampled in Minnesota and snow geese from Saskatchewan, Canada, were found to harbor APV RNA. Sequence analysis of wild bird APV strains showed high amino acid sequence identity among wild bird isolates (<97%) and between wild bird and turkey viral isolates (93.2%-99.3%). This study demonstrated that APV infections were present in domestic turkey flocks and wild birds outside the state of Minnesota; however, the role of wild birds in spreading APV to domestic turkeys remains unclear.

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)0.001
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations66
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAvian DiseasesSame topicRespiratory viral infections researchFrench-language works237,207