Analysis of adenovirus DNA detected in rodent species from the Democratic Republic of the Congo indicates potentially novel adenovirus types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different species of adenoviruses (AdVs) infect humans and animals and are known for their role as pathogens, especially in humans, with animals, primarily rodents, often serving as model systems. However, although we know over 100 types of human AdVs, we know comparatively little about the diversity of animal AdVs. Due to the fact that rodents are the most diverse family of mammals and a standard model system for human disease, we set out to sample African rodents native to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and test them for AdV DNA using a semi-nested consensus PCR. A total of 775 animals were tested, and viral DNA was detected in four of them. The AdV DNA found belongs to three different AdVs, all being closely related to murine adenovirus 2 (MAdV-2). Considering the genetic differences of the amplicon were 9%, 11% and 19% from MAdV-2 and at least 10% from each other, they seem to belong to up to three different novel types within the Murine mastadenovirus B species. This evidence of genetic diversity highlights the opportunities to isolate and study additional AdVs that infect rodents as models for AdV biology and pathology.
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".