MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280266807 · doi:10.1093/jme/tjv248

Can Subclinical Infestation by Paralyzing<i>Dermacentor andersoni</i>(Acari: Ixodidae) Induce Immunity to Tick Paralysis in Sheep?

2016· article· en· W2280266807 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Lysyk, Shaun J. Dergousoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Entomology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIxodidaeBiologyParalysisSubclinical infectionAcariVeterinary medicineParasitiformesCoumaphosPesticideVirologyEcologyMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cattle and sheep can develop immunity to paralysis caused by Dermacentor andersoni Stiles; however, this has been reported only in animals that were initially challenged with a high dose of ticks and exhibited clear symptoms of paralysis. Paralysis in sheep occurs in a dose-dependent fashion, with no paralysis occurring in sheep exposed to <0.2 ticks per kilogram sheep weight, and 100% paralysis in sheep exposed to >0.8 ticks per kilogram. This experiment was conducted to determine if sheep exposed to a low dose of ticks would also develop immunity to paralysis. Sheep were exposed to either a low (0.2 ticks per kilogram) or high dose of ticks (0.8 ticks per kilogram), then re-exposed to a second challenge of a paralyzing dose of ticks. All naïve sheep (eight of the eight) were paralyzed, while paralysis occurred in only four of the eight sheep previously exposed to a low dose, and one of the eight sheep previously exposed to a high dose. Results indicate that immunity can develop when sheep are exposed to a subclinical dose of paralyzing ticks, but in a smaller percentage of animals than those exposed to a high dose of ticks. Vaccine development perhaps remains the best option for nonacaricidal control of tick paralysis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EntomologySame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207