MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7001303232

Is it possible to improve the
\nbovine immune response to
\nmastitis using immunogenetics?

2019· other· en· W7001303232 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEpsilon Archive for Student Projects (University of Southampton) · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmune systemGenome-wide association studyMastitisSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypingPopulationGenetic associationAcquired immune systemMajor histocompatibility complexSelection (genetic algorithm)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mastitis is a major problem for cows all over the world. For decades selection against mastitis has been performed through direct and indirect selection. Favorable outcomes of reduced mastitis incidence include: Economic gains, reduced use of antibiotics as well as improved animal welfare. Lately, new immunogenetic methods have emerged and the era of genomic selection has arrived. The innate and adaptive immune response, the bovine MHC and epigenetics are all of great relevance in this endeavor to improve immune response (IR) in cattle. Regarding breed differences in IR, few studies have been carried out on this subject and several factors need to be examined.
\n
\nThe High Immune Response (HIR) technology is a patented method developed by the University of Guelph, it identifies so called high immune responders in the population. Another technique is Genome-wide association studies (GWAS), this method can be used to find the location of immune-related traits on the bovine genome. A few different GWAS will be accounted for. For example, GWAS searching for genome associations with natural antibodies (NAb) as well as for associations with antibody-mediated IR (AMIR) and cell-mediated IR (CMIR). Genomic selection (GS) is another modern technique in which estimated breeding values (EBV) are calculated based on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). This method requires a genotyped and phenotyped reference population and animals need only to be genotyped for the indicator markers to be assigned an EBV. This has reaped great success in increasing genetic gain as well as in decreasing generation intervals.
\n
\nCan these emerging methods surpass the results of the previously favored ones? The advantages as well as disadvantages are discussed. The disadvantages with the previous methods of selection for breeding are due to the time required and high expenses. Advantages with the emerging ones are faster results and shorter generation intervals. However, does the long-term genetic gain of GS actually surpass the traditional methods? Also, when manipulating the immune system, balance between responses must be considered. Otherwise, adverse effects like autoimmunity might appear. Sources of bias to the studies presented are also briefly mentioned. In conclusion, the area is still far too new to draw any major conclusions. However, it is a promising subject and further studies are of interest. The purpose of this literature study is to bring clarity to the question of whether it is possible to improve the bovine immune response to mastitis using immunogenetics.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · 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