Evaluation of autofluorescent Eimeria maxima oocysts as a potential indicator of non-viability when enumerating oocysts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging, poor oxygenation, or improper storage temperature can lead to variable Eimeria oocyst viability, which is not readily assessed microscopically. Under fluorescent microscopy, some aged Eimeria maxima (EM) oocysts were strongly autofluorescent (AF) within the oocystoplasm and sporocysts, whereas others were distinctly non-fluorescent, leading to the hypothesis that non-viable oocysts may be detectible using this simple approach. Using accelerated aging conditions at 45°C, two experiments were conducted to evaluate variable percentages of autofluorescent EM oocysts on body weight gain (BWG), lesion scores (LS), and total oocyst shedding (OS) per bird. Through oral gavage, EM oocysts were administered on d10, whereas LS and BWG were determined d5 post-inoculation. Experiment 1 groups consisted of non-challenged controls (n = 15), or 25,000 EM exhibiting 12.8% (n = 14), 61.1% (n = 10), or 93.3% (n = 10) autofluorescence. BWG in 12.8% AF group was lower (P = 0.054) than non-challenged control. LS were higher (P < 0.05) in 61.1% and 12.8% AF groups as compared to non-challenged control and 93.3% AF groups. Experiment 2 groups consisted of non-challenged controls (LS n = 20/BWG n = 40), or 22,500 EM exhibiting 7% AF (LS n = 20/BWG n = 40), 80.6% AF (LS n = 19/BWG n = 39), or 99% AF (LS n = 19/BWG n = 39). BWG in 7% AF group was lower (P < 0.05) than non-challenged control and 99% AF groups. LS were higher (P < 0.05) in 80.6% and 7% AF groups as compared to non-challenged control and 99% AF groups. OS from d5-8 post-inoculation was determined for each of five replicates per group (n = 20/group; n = 4/replicate), with higher (P < 0.05) OS in 80.6% and 7% AF groups than in non-challenged control or 99% AF groups. Taken together, data indicate lower LS, higher BWG, and reduced OS with higher %AF oocysts, consistent with the hypothesis of lowered viable challenge with this EM isolate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".