18 Genetic and Phenotypic Parameters for Aleutian Disease Tests and Their Correlations with Pelt Quality, Reproductive Performance, Packed-cell Volume, and Harvest Length in Mink
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aleutian disease (AD) is an untreatable immune complex disease in mink and brings tremendous economic losses to the mink industry globally. The ineffectiveness of culling, immunoprophylaxis, and medical treatment in controlling AD have urged mink farmers to select AD-resilient mink based on the AD tests. However, the genetic analysis of these tests and their correlations with AD-resilient traits have not been investigated. In this study, data on 5,824 mink were used to estimate the genetic and phenotypic parameters of four AD tests, including two systems of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), counterimmunoelectrophoresis (CIEP), and iodine agglutination test (IAT), and their genetic and phenotypic correlations with pelt quality, reproductive performance, packed-cell volume (PCV), and harvest length (HL). Significance (P < 0.05) of fixed effects (sex, year, color type, the number of mating, and dam age), covariates (age at blood sampling and age at harvest), and random effects (additive genetic, permanent environmental, and maternal effects) were determined using univariate models. The genetic and phenotypic parameters for all traits were estimated under bivariate models using ASReml 4.1. Estimated heritabilities (±SE) were 0.39±0.05, 0.61±0.07, 0.11±0.07, and 0.26±0.05 for antigen-based ELISA (ELISA-G), virus capsid protein-based ELISA, CIEP, and IAT, respectively. The ELISA-G showed moderate repeatability (0.58±0.04) and significant (P < 0.05) negative genetic correlations (±SE) with reproductive performance traits (from -0.41±0.16 to -0.49±0.12), PCV (-0.53±0.09), and HL (-0.45±0.16). These results indicated that the selection of mink with a lower ELISA-G score could not only decrease the anti-AMDV antibody level and the extent of anemia but also improve the female reproductive performance and the harvest length of mink without causing adverse influences on the pelt quality. Hence, ELISA-G could be applied as an indicator for genetic selection of AD-resilient mink and help mink farmers reduce the adverse effects of AD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".