MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inactivation Validation of Ebola, Marburg and Lassa Viruses in AVL-Ethanol Treated Viral Cultures

2024· preprint· en· W4400835983 on OpenAlexaff
Todd Cutts, Anders Leung, Logan Banadyga, Jay Krishnan

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLassa feverLassa virusVirologyEbola virusMarburg virusBiosafetyBiologyTiterVirusBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High consequence pathogens such as Ebola, Marburg and Lassa viruses are handled in maximum containment Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratories. Genetic material is often isolated from such viruses and subsequently removed from BSL-4 for a multitude of downstream analyses using readily accessible technologies and equipment available at lower biosafety level laboratories. However, it is essential to ensure that these materials are free of viable viruses before removal from BSL-4 to guarantee sample safety. This study details the in-house procedure used for validating the inactivation of Ebola, Marburg and Lassa virus cultures after incubation with AVL lysis buffer (Qiagen) and ethanol. This study’s findings showed no viable virus was detectable when high-titer cultures of Ebola, Marburg, and Lassa viruses were incubated with AVL lysis buffer for 10 minutes, followed by an equal volume of 95% ethanol for 3 minutes, using a method with a sensitivity of ≤0.8 log10 TCID50 as the limit of detection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicViral Infections and Outbreaks ResearchFrench-language works237,207