<i>Nosema ceranae</i>, the most common microsporidium infecting <i>Apis mellifera</i> in the main beekeeping regions of China since at least 2005
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and distribution of Nosema spp. in Apis mellifera using historical worker bee samples collected between 2005 and 2010 in China. Out of 292 samples initially analysed by microscopy, 69 were Nosema spore positive. The prevalence of Nosema infections in Southern China (38.9%) was higher than in Central and Northern China (21.9 and 16.7%, respectively). Positive samples were subjected to multiplex PCR amplifications with primers corresponding to 16S rRNA specific sequences of Nosema ceranae and Nosema apis. N. apis was detected in only one sample collected in 2008 in Shandong province, whereas N. ceranae was detected in 68 samples, which indicates that N. ceranae is the most common Nosema species infecting A. mellifera in China since at least 2005.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".