MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116849458 · doi:10.64898/2025.12.19.694637

Zoonotic and Avian Pathogen Detections in Fecal and Sediment Samples – A Low-risk, High-throughput One Health Approach to Surveillance

2025· article· W7116849458 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gabriela J. Rzeszutek, Jordan Wight, Mustafa S. Jafri, Abigail J. Erwin, Morgan R. Hiebert, Ryan J. Harrigan, Megan Halbrook, Nicole A. Hoff, Isaac I. Bogoch, Jason Kindrachuk, Hannah L. Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsFecesWaterfowlOutbreakInfluenza A virusFecal coliformInfluenza A virus subtype H5N1Virus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many pathogens, both those with human spillover potential as well as avian-specific viruses, are maintained in wild bird populations. While routine surveillance for influenza A viruses (IAVs) is performed annually, surveillance for other pathogens is limited. Sampling of wild birds is time-consuming, labour-intensive, often limited in sample size, and involves handling of wild and potentially infected birds, posing an increased risk of direct exposure for personnel. Additional methods for surveillance are needed given these significant challenges. Longitudinal fecal and sediment sampling was performed at various sites in southern Manitoba, Canada, particularly focused in Winnipeg from May to October 2025. Sites were chosen based on the suitability of the area for waterfowl habitat, the presence of waterfowl in the area, as well as proximity to reported outbreaks of H5N1 influenza virus. Fecal and sediment samples were collected and screened for the presence of influenza A virus (IAV), Newcastle disease virus (NDV), avian reovirus (ARV), and avian poxvirus (APXV). In total, 782 combined fecal and sediment samples were collected. Of the 714 fecal samples, 34 tested positive for IAV RNA (4.8% prevalence). None of the IAV-positive fecal samples tested positive for H5 RNA. Of the 68 sediments, 15 were positive for IAV RNA (22.1% prevalence), four of which were positive for H5 RNA. NDV RNA positivity was low, with only four positive fecal samples (0.6% prevalence) that were all collected on the same day. ARV RNA positivity was also low, with five positive sediment samples (7.4% prevalence in sediment samples). None of the samples tested positive for APXV DNA. This study builds on previous work showing the utility of environmental sampling for a variety of avian and zoonotic pathogens using a One Health approach that is low-risk, efficient, and high-throughput.

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)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology→French-language works237,207→