Exploration of genetic factors resulting in abnormal disease in cattle experimentally challenged with bovine spongiform encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the discovery of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), researchers have orally challenged cattle with infected brain material to study various aspects of disease pathogenesis. Unlike most other pathogens, oral BSE challenge does not always result in the expected clinical presentation and pathology. In a recent study, steers were challenged orally with BSE and all developed clinical signs and were sacrificed and tested. However, despite a similar incubation and clinical presentation, one of the steers did not have detectable PrPSc in its brain. Samples from this animal were analysed for genetic differences as well as for the presence of in vitro PrPSc seeding activity or infectivity to determine the BSE status of this animal and the potential reasons that it was different. Seeding activity was detected in the brainstem of the abnormal steer but it was approximately one million times less than that found in the normal BSE positive steers. Intra-cranial challenge of bovinized transgenic mice resulted in no transmission of disease. The abnormal steer had different genetic sequences in non-coding regions of the PRNP gene but detection of similar genotypes in Canadian BSE field cases, that showed the expected brain pathology, suggested these differences may not be the primary cause of the abnormal result. Breed composition analysis showed a higher Hereford content in the abnormal steer as well as in two Canadian atypical BSE field cases and several additional abnormal experimental animals. This study could point towards a possible impact of breed composition on BSE pathogenesis.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".