Novel Penicillium species causing disseminated disease in a Labrador Retriever dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report describes the phenotypic characteristics of a novel Penicillium species, Penicillium labradorum, isolated from a 3-year-old male, castrated, Labrador retriever with disseminated fungal disease. The dog's presenting clinical signs included lethargy, lymphadenopathy, tachypnea, moderate pitting edema, and nonweight bearing lameness associated with the right hind limb. Fine-needle aspirate biopsies from the sublumbar and prescapular lymph nodes were initially examined. The cytologic findings were consistent with pyogranulomatous inflammation with abundant extracellular and phagocytized fungal fragments and hyphae. Based on the morphology of the organisms and lack of endogenous pigment, hyalohyphomycosis was considered most likely, with Fusarium, Penicillium, and Paecilomyces species being considerations. Fungal isolates were obtained via culture of samples from the lymph nodes, and molecular identification testing originally identified an undescribed Penicillium species belonging to the Penicillium section Exilicaulis. BLAST searches and phylogenetic analyses performed approximately 1 year and 9 months after the isolation date revealed an isolate within the Penicillium parvum clade in the Penicillium section Exilicaulis but phylogenetically distant from the other species in the section, thus representing a new species, Penicillium labradorum. Antifungal susceptibility testing was also performed on the isolate and low minimum inhibitory concentrations were observed with terbinafine, voriconazole, and posaconazole, while in vitro resistance was observed with fluconazole. The dog had been previously treated with fluconazole, itraconazole, amphotericin B lipid complex, voriconazole, and terbinafine. Approximately 587 days after the initial diagnosis, the dog was euthanized due to worsening of clinical signs and concerns for quality of life.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".