MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197923861 · doi:10.1155/2021/9993571

Camel Mastitis: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Isolation of Major Bacterial Pathogens in Gomole District of Borena Zone, Southern Ethiopia

2021· article· en· W3197923861 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Medicine International · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Diversity and Health Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMastitisCalifornia mastitis testMedicineSubclinical infectionVeterinary medicineLactationQuarter (Canadian coin)Internal medicineBiologyPregnancyGeographyIce calvingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As of other dairy animals, dromedary camel could be affected by mastitis, a complex disease occurring worldwide among dairy animals, with heavy economic losses largely due to clinical and subclinical mastitis. Yet, little is known about the occurrence and potential risk factors exposing to lactating camel mastitis in Ethiopia. Consequently, a cross-sectional study was carried out from November 2018 to April 2019 so as to determine the prevalence, associated risk factors, and major bacterial pathogens causing mastitis in traditionally managed lactating camels in Gomole district of Borena Zone. Consequently, 348 lactating camels were examined for clinical and subclinical mastitis, using California Mastitis Test (CMT). The overall prevalence of mastitis was 22.4% (78/348), including clinical 4.3% (15/348) and subclinical 18.1% (63/348) cases, respectively, whereas the quarter level prevalence of mastitis was 16.6% (232/1,392). Of the total 1,392 examined teats, the right hind (RHQ) (4.3%, 60/1392) and left hind quarters (LHQ) (4.3%, 60/1392) were the most frequently infected quarter, whereas the left front quarter (LFQ) (3.9%, 55/1392) was the least infected quarter. Age, body condition score, and lactation stages were significantly associated ( <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mi>p</a:mi> <a:mo>&lt;</a:mo> <a:mn>0.05</a:mn> </a:math> ) with lactating camel mastitis prevalence among the putative risk factors. Among 312 quarters milk samples subjected to bacteriological examination, 69.9% (218/312) yielded mastitis causing pathogens, both Gram-positive and -negative bacterial isolates, while no growth was observed in 30.1% (94/312) of quarters sampled. Of the bacterial isolates obtained by culturing, Streptococcus spp. excluding Streptococcus agalactiae (S. agalactiae) (26.1%; 57/218) and Coagulase negative Staphylococci (22.9%, 50/218) were the dominant isolates identified, whereas S. agalactiae (3.2%, 7/218) was the least isolates obtained. The prevalence of camel mastitis in the study area was found to be considerably high. Hence, implementation of integrated approaches has great importance in the study setting for the prevention and control of mastitis so as to improve quality of camel milk, minimize economic loss, and prevent significant public health risks.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.225 · 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