MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177341758 · doi:10.21423/aabppro20064679

Update on Leptospira hardjo-bovis Control in Beef Herds

2006· article· en· W3177341758 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven E. Wikse

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Association of Bovine Practitioners Conference Proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicLeptospirosis research and findings
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyVeterinary medicineCattle DiseasesLeptospiraLeptospirosisMedicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leptospira hardjo bovis has emerged as the most common leptospiral infection of cattle in the United States and Canada. Its new name is Leptospira borgpetersenii serovar Hardjo (hardjo bovis), referred to as 'hardjo-bovis'. The main reason for the widespread prevalence of hardjo-bovis is that it is very efficiently transmitted by a chronic renal carrier/shedder state lasting a year or more. Also, traditionaJ 5-way leptospira vaccines have provided poor protection against hardjobovis because they contain a different hardjo organism, L. hardjo prajitno, which is not found in North America.
 Experimental and natural infections of cattle with hardjo-bovis result in reproductive losses including embryonic death, abortion, stillbirths and weak calves. In addition, involvement of the mammary glands in hardjobovis infections can result in the "mastitis/flabby bag syndrome" of beef cattle. In the field, it has been extremely difficult to diagnose hardjo-bovis because traditional use of serology to diagnose leptospiral infections works very poorly for diagnosis of hardjo-bovis. As the maintenance host for hardjo-bovis, cattle mount a weak and transitory antibody response to infection. Identification of leptospires in urine correlated with antibody titers to hardjo-bovis and several other serovars of leptospira can overcome that obstacle to diagnosis. The combination of losses typically not noticed by ranchers, such as embryonic deaths, and the difficulties in diagnosing hardjo-bovis as the cause of obvious losses like abortions have made hardjo-bovis a "hidden disease".
 Programs to control hardjo-bovis in beef herds are now possible because of the identification of two antibiotics that can clear the renal carrier state of hardjo-bovis and the availability of new leptospira vaccines that contain hardjo-bovis. Hardjo-bovis control programs have four parts: 1) enhancement of general herd resistance; 2) biosecurity; 3) antibiotic treatment to eliminate the renal carrier state; and 4) vaccination. The primary consideration in the decision on whether to implement a control program for hardjo-bovis in a beef herd is how great is the disease threat?
 There are still gaps in our understanding of hardjo-bovis infection of beef herds. Diagnostic testing is still cumbersome. Hardjo-bovis-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests now being perfected will make possible accurate, fast diagnoses of hardjobovis in urine or tissue samples. That will greatly aid in identification of problem herds and in monitoring the success of control programs. Like most infectious diseases of cattle, clinical trials are needed in United States beef cow/calf operations to determine the herd-level economic impact of hardjo-bovis infection and efficacy of control programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Association of Bovine Practitioners Conference ProceedingsSame topicLeptospirosis research and findingsFrench-language works237,207