Cerebral amyloid angiopathy and comparative analysis of amyloid-β protein in birds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Senile plaques and cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA)?are well-documented in various mammals, and several species even exhibit neurofibrillary tangle (NFT). However, we know far less about whether such symptoms are present in birds. Therefore, here we clarified the occurrence and pathogenesis of avian aβ-related lesions, analyzing the aβ amino-acid sequence across 28 birds at multiple life stages, representing 15 species, 14 genera, and 9 nine families.?We also determined the expected aβ amino-acid sequence after comparing data from the brains of nine birds (seven species) with publicly available NCBI data. We observed CAA and senile plaque-like deposition only in a female Amazon parrot, estimated to be around 30–40 years old. We identified two Aβ depositions (40 and 42) in the same location that correspond to Aβ 6-42. Additionally, we observed severe Aβ deposition, accompanied by severe hemorrhaging, in blood vessels of the superficial and deep portions of the brain. These lesions were directly related to the cause of death. Of 40 bird species, 36 exhibited type 1 Aβ amino-acid sequences, similar to humans. Given that all of these birds were old, our results suggest that Aβ is deposited primarily as CAA as the animals age. This report is the first clinically based description of CAA in birds. Interspecific variation likely exists because we identified species that did not exhibit Aβ deposition even when the birds are old enough. However, even birds of the same taxonomic status differed in whether they possessed or lacked Aβ deposition. Thus, other factors besides Aβ amino-acid sequence could influence this symptom.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".