The complexity of human infected AIV H5N6 isolated from China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Novel avian influenza viruses (AIVs) of H7N9, H10N8, and H5N6 are currently circulating in China's poultry flocks, occasionally infecting human and other mammals. Human infected AIV H5N6 in China during 2014-2015 is believed to be a triple reassortant originated from H6N6 and two clades of H5 viruses. The current report suggests that its reassortment history is more complicated. METHODS: Genomes of human infected isolates of AIV H5N6 were searched from the NCBI Influenza Virus Sequence Database and the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Influenza Data. Sequences shared high identities with each segment of their genomes were obtained through the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool. Alignments were done by mafft-7.037-win32 program; 8 large-scale and then 8 gradually converged phylogenetic trees were constructed by using MEGA5.1/5.2/6.0 Software. RESULTS: The events that each segment of the genomes of human infected AIV H5N6 isolates circulated in China had evolved into its current status might have happened before 2013, and so were they then reassorted into the epidemic AIV H5N6. A/Guangzhou/39715/2014(H5N6) and A/Sichuan/26221/2014(H5N6) had their six internal segments (PB2, PB1, PA, NP, NEP, and M) in common, and were reassorted from AIVs H5N1 in the same period and same region as that of HA, while A/Yunnan/0127/2015(H5N6) derived its six internal segments from AIV H9N2 that has been prevalent in Eastern China since 2008. CONCLUSIONS: AIV H5N6 isolates established from both human and poultry in China during 2014-2015 were heterogeneous; both AIVs H5N1 and H9N2 were involved in the reassortment of AIV H5N6 in China.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".