Comparison of individual and pooled sampling methods for estimation of <i>Vairimorpha</i> ( <i>Nosema</i> ) spp. levels in experimentally infected honey bee colonies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The microsporidian pathogens Vairimorpha apis and V. ceranae are known to cause intestinal infection in honey bees and are associated with decreased colony productivity and colony loss. The widely accepted method for determining Vairimorpha colony infection level for risk assessment and antibiotic treatment is based on spore counts of 60 pooled worker bees using light microscopy. Given that honey bee colonies consist of as many as 1,000 times more individuals, the number of bees collected for Vairimorpha detection may significantly impact the estimated colony infection level, especially in the case of uneven distribution of high- and low-infected individuals within a hive. Hence, we compared the frequency and severity of Vairimorpha infection in individual bees to pooled samples of 60, 120, and 180 bees, as well as compared the Vairimorpha spp. prevalence in pooled samples of 60 and 180 bees. Overall, we did not find significant differences in spore counts in pooled samples containing incremental numbers of bees, although we observed that, in less-infected colonies, a low frequency of highly infected individuals influenced the estimated colony infection level. Moreover, Vairimorpha spp. prevalence did not differ significantly among the pooled bee samples tested. Increasing the number of pooled bees from the recommended 60 bees to 180 bees did not yield a more accurate representation of colony infection level for highly infected colonies, but the clinical importance of a low frequency of highly infected individuals in less-infected colonies needs to be addressed in future studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".