In Vivo Characterization of Avian Influenza A (H5N1) and (H7N9) Viruses Isolated from Canadian Travelers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 and low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) H7N9 viruses pose a severe threat to public health through zoonotic infection, causing severe respiratory disease in humans. While HPAI H5N1 human infections have typically been reported in Asian countries, avian H7N9 human infections have been reported mainly in China. However, Canada reported a case of fatal human infection by the HPAI H5N1 virus in 2014, and two cases of human illness associated with avian H7N9 virus infection in 2015. While the genomes of the causative viruses A/Alberta/01/2014 (H5N1) (AB14 (H5N1)) and A/British Columbia/1/2015 (H7N9) (BC15 (H7N9)) are reported, the isolates had not been evaluated for their pathogenicity in animal models. In this study, we characterized the pathogenicity of AB14 (H5N1) and BC15 (H7N9) and found that both strain isolates are highly lethal in mice. AB14 (H5N1) caused systemic viral infection and erratic proinflammatory cytokine gene expression in different organs. In contrast, BC15 (H7N9) replicated efficiently only in the respiratory tract, and was a potent inducer for proinflammatory cytokine genes in the lungs. Our study provides experimental evidence to complement the specific human case reports and animal models for evaluating vaccine and antiviral candidates against potential influenza pandemics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 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".