MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929776177 · doi:10.5066/p9t541ml

Sample locations 2022 SARS-CoV-2 testing in little brown bats

2023· dataset· en· W6929776177 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUSGS DOI Tool Production Environment · 2023
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Virus Infections Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlife diseaseWildlifeWildlife managementFungal diseaseMyotis lucifugus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential introduction of SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, into North American bat populations is of interest to wildlife managers due to recent declines of several species. Populations of little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus) have collapsed due to white-nose syndrome (WNS), a disease caused by the introduction and spread of the fungal pathogen Pseudogymnoascus destructans (Pd). Throughout much of the United States and southern Canada, large colonies of the species routinely established diurnal roosts in anthropogenic structures creating the potential for direct human contact and cross-species disease transmission. Given recent declines and the potential for further disease impacts, we collected oral swabs from eight little brown bat colonies for RT-qPCR analysis to describe the presence and prevalence of SARS-CoV-2. We visited colonies in Maryland (n = 1), New Hampshire (n = 1), New Jersey (n = 2), New York (n = 1), Rhode Island (n = 2), and Virginia (n = 1) during May-August, 2022. We have analyzed samples from 235 individuals and all have tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Our results indicate that little brown bats are either negative for SARS-CoV-2 or that it persists in undetectable levels in populations of the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast in the summer months. Nonetheless, future work addressing other seasons or using serologic approaches may still be warranted to conclusively determine disease status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSGS DOI Tool Production EnvironmentSame topicAnimal Virus Infections StudiesFrench-language works237,207