MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323663255 · doi:10.37871/jbres1659

Migratory Songbirds Transport Amblyomma longirostre and Amblyomma maculatum Ticks to Canada

2023· article· en· W4323663255 on OpenAlexaffabout
ohn D Scott, Jaclyn TA McKeown, Catherine Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Research & Environmental Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmblyommaBiologyTickSpotted feverRickettsiosisZoologyTick-borne diseaseRocky Mountain spotted feverAmblyomma americanumRickettsiaIxodidaeEcologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Birds transport ticks into Canada during northward spring migration, and some of these ticks are infected with tick-borne zoonotic pathogens. Some Amblyomma species harbour pathogens that cause debilitating diseases that can be fatal to humans, and domestic and wildlife animals. At least 65 Amblyomma spp. are indigenous in the Western Hemisphere, and approximately half bite humans. Amblyomma longirostre carries Rickettsia amblyommatis which causes spotted fever group rickettsiosis, a febrile disease in humans. Additionally, Amblyomma maculatum harbors and transmits Rickettsia parkeri, a spotted fever group rickettsiosis, and this tick bites humans. In the present study, we use two technologies to identify ticks. To confirm identification, we took microphotographs followed by DNA barcoding of the cytochrome c oxidase I gene. Based on molecular analysis, we confirmed that the two Amblyomma spp. were Amblyomma longirostre, a neotropical tick and Amblyomma maculatum, the Gulf Coast tick. Based on our tick-bird findings, we confirm that migratory songbirds transport Amblyomma ticks into Canada, and have the potential, either directly or indirectly, to transmit tick-borne zoonotic pathogens to humans.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Research & Environmental SciencesSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207