Viral co-infections targeting the porcine respiratory system: Consequences and limits of the experimental systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coinfections affecting the porcine respiratory system have often been overlooked, in favor of mono-infections, even though they are significantly more common in the field. In pigs, the term 'porcine respiratory complex' is used to describe coinfections involving both viruses, such as, for example, the swine influenza type A virus (swIAV), the porcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virus (PRRSV), and the porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV-2), as well as bacteria. Until recently, most studies were primarily focused on clinical aspects and paid little attention to the molecular consequences of coinfections. This narrative review addresses the consequences of coinfections in the porcine respiratory system involving viruses. When possible, interactions that can occur between viruses are briefly presented. Conversely, research involving bacteria, protozoa, and fungi has not been considered at all. Finally, the main limitations complicating the interpretation of results from coinfection/superinfection studies are considered, and prospects in this exciting field of health research are presented.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".