Ophidiomycosis in Red Cornsnakes ( <i>Pantherophis guttatus</i> ): Potential Roles of Brumation and Temperature on Pathogenesis and Transmission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ophidiomycosis (snake fungal disease) is caused by the fungus Ophidiomyces ophiodiicola. As ophidiomycosis is difficult to study in free-ranging snakes, a reliable experimental model is needed to investigate transmission, pathogenesis, morbidity, and mortality, and the effects of brumation and temperature on disease development. Our objective was to develop such a model via subcutaneous injection of O. ophiodiicola conidia in red cornsnakes ( Pantherophis guttatus). The model was used to evaluate transmission and the effects of brumation and temperature in co-housed inoculated and noninoculated snakes. All 23 inoculated snakes developed lesions consistent with ophidiomycosis, including heterophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, cellulitis, and myositis, and embolic fungal granulomas throughout the liver and the coelomic connective tissue in 21/23 (91%). In the inoculated snakes, 21% of skin swabs, 37% of exuvia, and all liver samples tested positive by qPCR (quantitative polymerase chain reaction) for O. ophiodiicola. A post brumation skin swab from 1/12 noninoculated snakes that brumated in contact with inoculated snakes tested positive by qPCR, suggesting possible contact transmission. That snake had microscopic skin lesions consistent with ophidiomycosis, but no visible fungal elements. Of the 23 inoculated snakes, 20 (87%) died over the 70-day experiment, with ophidiomycosis considered the primary cause of death; 12 (52%) of the inoculated snakes died during brumation. Overall, this experimental model of ophidiomycosis reproduced skin lesions analogous to those of many natural cases, and internal lesions similar to the most severe natural cases. The study provides tentative experimental evidence for horizontal transmission in brumation, and offers a tool for future studies of this widespread snake disease.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".