Monitoring of contagious skin diseases of dogs and cats in Odessa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skin diseases in dogs and cats occupy one of the leading places among the diseases in these species of animals. The purpose of this work was to monitor the most common contagious skin diseases in dogs and cats (otodicosis, demodicosis, dermatomycosis) during 2018 in Odessa. To solve the goal several tasks were set: to find out the species and breed structure of dogs and cats otodicosis diseases; to find out the breed structure of dogs demodicosis diseases; to find out the species and breed structure of dogs and cats dermatomycosis diseases; to determine the seasonality of otodicosis, demodicosis and dermatomycosis of dogs and cats in Odessa city during 2018. The material was provided by the data concerning sick animals registered in logs on the basis of two veterinary clinics (Gabi and Aibolit) in Odessa. These logs data were entered in the tables and analyzed statistically. For the experimental period, 134 animals were infected with contagious skin diseases, among them 51 animals were infected with otodicosis, 34 animals – with demodicosis, and 49 animals-with dermatodicosis (trichophytosis and microsporia). More cats than dogs suffered from otodicosis and demodicosis. The largest number of animals infected with otodicosis is represented by cats of Metis breed (54.2%), cats of Scottish Fold breed amounted 8.3%, cats of Persian, Maine Coon and British Shorthairs breeds – by 6.3%. Dogs of Métis breed suffered from demodicosis largely, it accounted (29.4%), dogs of Pug breed accounted 14.7%, dogs of French Bulldog breed – 11.8%. Non pedigree cats – 86.2% and non pedigree dogs – 35% suffered with dermatomycosis. Otodicosis was registered every month, except January. The increase of disease was noted in June, August, October and December. Demodicosis was registered every month, except January. The increase of disease was noted in March, September, October and December. Dermatomycosis was registered every month. The increase of disease was noted in March-April and August-December. In order to control the epizootic situation regarding contagious skin diseases of carnivorous animals in Odessa city further systematic monitoring must be carried out.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".