The prevalence of blood-borne bacterial infections in domestic cats in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of ' Bartonella' spp. and hemoplasma infection in healthy pet cats in Ontario. Blood samples collected from July 2006 to March 2007, were tested for ' Bartonella' spp. by PCR (646 samples) and by blood culture (896 samples, April 2006 to March 2007), and by PCR for diagnosis of hemoplasma (742 samples). The overall prevalence of 'Bartonella' spp. and hemoplasma was 4.3% (3.7% 'Bartonella henselae,' 0.6% 'Bartonella clarridgeiae') and 4% (3.3% 'Mycoplasma hemominutum,' 0.7% 'Mycoplasma hemofelis'), repectively. The presence of ' M. turicensis,' was identified by PCR amplification and sequencing, for the first time in North America. The other goal of the study was to investigate the presence of ' Rickettsia felis' in cat fleas in Ontario. A pool of one to five fleas from 50 infested cats were collected and used for PCR. The presence of ' R. felis' was confirmed in 9 of 50 samples.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".