MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406687352 · doi:10.3390/v17020141

Phylogeographic Characterizations of Recent (2015–2023) Senecavirus A Isolates from Canada

2025· article· en· W4406687352 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kate Hole, Oksana Vernygora, Katherine Handel, Michelle Nebroski, Oliver Lung, Charles Nfon, Shawn Babiuk

Bibliographic record

VenueViruses · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCanadian Science Centre for Human and Animal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhylogeographyVesicular StomatitisChinaVesicular stomatitis virusBiologyPhylogeneticsGenomePhylogenetic treeVirologyVirusGeographyEvolutionary biologyGeneticsGeneArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Senecavirus A (SVA) continues to cause vesicular lesions in swine in Canada and many regions worldwide. Since the vesicular lesions caused by SVA are similar to those caused by foot and mouth disease virus, swine vesicular disease virus and vesicular stomatitis virus, a foreign animal disease investigation must be initiated to rule out these diseases. SVA isolates from pigs displaying vesicular lesions in Canada from 2015 to 2023 were sequenced, and phylogeographic analysis was performed using the complete genome sequences. The results infer that SVA has spread between the United States and Canada several times. In addition, the results suggest that SVA spreads from different regions. SVA spread was inferred from Canada into Thailand, India and Mexico and inferred from the United States to Brazil, Columbia, Chile and China with ten separate introductions. Furthermore, recombination was observed in SVA genomes from Canada, the United States and China.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirusesSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207