Spleen Swabs for Sensitive and High-Throughput Detection of African Swine Fever Virus by Real-Time PCR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
African swine fever (ASF) continues to spread in Africa, Europe, Asia, and the island of Hispaniola increasing the need to develop more streamlined and highly efficient surveillance and diagnostic capabilities. One way to achieve this is by further optimization of already established standard operating procedures to remove bottlenecks for high-throughput screening. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the most sensitive and specific assay available for the early detection of ASF, but it requires high quality nucleic acid extracted from the samples. Whole blood from live pigs and spleen tissue from dead pigs are the preferred samples for ASF RT-PCR. Whole blood can be used as is in nucleic acid extraction, but spleen tissues require an additional homogenization step. In this study, we compared the homogenates and swabs prepared from 52 spleen samples collected from pigs experimentally inoculated with highly and moderately virulent ASF virus strains. The results show that not only are the spleen swabs more sensitive when executed with a low-cell-count nucleic acid extraction procedure followed by RT-PCR assays, they also increase the ability to isolate ASFV from positive spleen samples. Swabbing is a convenient, simpler, and less time-consuming alternative to tissue homogenization. Hence, we recommend spleen swabs over tissue homogenates for high-throughput detection of ASFV by real-time PCR.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".