Bird Species Involved in West Nile Virus Epidemiological Cycle in Southern Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite many studies on West Nile Virus (WNV) in the US, including the reservoir role of bird species and the summer shifts of the Culex mosquito, feeding from birds to mammals, there have been few equivalent studies in the neighboring regions of Canada where WNV is endemic. Here, a priority list of bird species likely involved in WNV transmission in the greater Montréal area is constructed by combining three sources of data: (i) from WNV surveillance in wild birds (2002–2015); (ii) blood meal analysis of Culex pipiens–restuans (CPR), the primary enzootic vectors of WNV in the region, collected from surveillance in 2008 and 2014; (iii) literature review on the sero-prevalence/host competence of resident birds. Each of these data sources yielded 18, 23 and 53 species, and overall, 67 different bird species were identified as potential WNV amplifiers/reservoirs. Of those identified from CPR blood meals, Common starlings, American robins, Song sparrows and House sparrows ranked the highest and blood meal analysis demonstrated a seasonal shift in feed preference from birds to mammals by CPR. Our study indicates that there are broad similarities in the ecology of WNV between our region and the northeastern US, although the relative importance of bird species varies somewhat between regions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".