MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416935128 · doi:10.1177/10406387251395204

Histopathology of nosemosis in honey bees: correlation with manual counting and comparison of staining methods

2025· article· en· W4416935128 on OpenAlexafffund
Elsa Racine, Magaly Bégin-Pépin, Marie‐Odile Benoit‐Biancamano

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'AlimentationUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de MontréalFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
KeywordsHemocytometerStainingHistopathologyHistologySpore

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nosemosis, caused by Vairimorpha ( Nosema ) ceranae or V. ( Nosema ) apis , is the main fungal disease affecting the Western honey bee ( Apis mellifera ). We evaluated the use of histology in the diagnosis of disease, identified the histologic patterns, and compared the efficacy of different staining techniques. We sampled 10 hives, collecting ~80 bees per hive. Spore counts were performed on 60 bees per sample using a hemocytometer in accordance with the standard procedure. Slides of whole bees were produced from the remaining bees, stained with 15 different techniques, and observed under a light microscope at 400×. Infection in the ventriculus was graded using hematoxylin–phloxine–saffron stain; prevalence and severity of the infection were determined; and an intra-class coefficient (ICC) was calculated to correlate the histologic results with the standard counting method. Based on contrast, specificity, and sensitivity, we found hot Gram chromotrope and Ziehl–Neelsen stains offered the best approach for highlighting Vairimorpha spores. These stains were optimized to find the ideal staining times for Vairimorpha by testing different immersion durations in key steps to enhance spore contrast. There was a notable association between histologic observations and spore count, with an ICC of 0.74 (95% CI [0.36, 0.91]) and 0.82 (95% CI [0.54, 0.93]) for the percentage of infected bees and histologic grade, respectively. Lesions included distension of ventricular epithelial cells, intracellular microsporidia, reduced ciliation, and disintegration of the peritrophic membrane. No spores were detected in extra-ventricular organs.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic InvestigationSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207