MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794726474 · doi:10.31274/ans_air-180814-285

Selection for Increased Natural Antibody Levels to Improve Disease Resilience in Pigs

2018· report· en· W2794726474 on OpenAlexaff
Laura E. Tibbs‐Cortes, Carolyn Ashley, Austin M. Putz, Kyu‐Sang Lim, Michael K. Dyck, Frédéric Fontin, Graham Plastow, Jack C. M. Dekkers, John C. S. Harding

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Virus Infections Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre de Développement du Porc du QuébecUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffspringResilience (materials science)DiseaseSelection (genetic algorithm)BiologyHerdPsychological resilienceAntibodyNatural selectionAnimal scienceVeterinary medicineImmunologyMedicinePsychologyGeneticsPregnancyComputer scienceInternal medicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breeding animals are typically raised under high health conditions in nucleus herds, but their offspring are often exposed to multiple disease challenges in commercial production facilities. Because breeding animals are not exposed to many common swine pathogens, it is difficult to select for resilience to disease. A possible solution is selecting for levels of natural antibodies (NAb), which can be measured in a high health environment and in this study are shown to correlate with disease resilience and to be heritable (h2 = 0.11 to 0.39). Therefore, breeding for increased NAb levels in clean conditions could be a valuable method to improve resilience and decrease mortality in market pigs. Work is ongoing to verify the potential of this prediction.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Virus Infections StudiesFrench-language works237,207