MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117731351 · doi:10.37871/jbres2192

Molecular Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Babesia odocoilei, Babesia microti and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in Ixodes Ticks in British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· W7117731351 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John D Scott, Catherine Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Research & Environmental Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBabesiaBorrelia burgdorferiAnaplasma phagocytophilumIxodesIxodes scapularisSensuPopulationTick

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In total, 76 Ixodes ticks were collected in southwestern British Columbia (BC). Five Ixodes species (I. angustus, I. cookei, I. pacificus, I. scapularis, and I. spinipalpis), which bite humans, were collected and tested. Two Ixodes spp. (I. rugosus, I. sculptus), which do not bite humans, were collected and tested. Using real-time and nested PCR, the four pathogens were detected, namely Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (19/76, 25%), Babesia odocoilei (12/76, 16%), Babesia microti (1/76, 1%), and Anaplasma phagocytophylum (2/76, 3%). We provide the first report of Ixodes scapularis parasitizing an eastern cottontail, Sylvilagus floridanus, in Canada. We document the first molecular identification of Ixodes sculptus parasitizing an American mink, Neogale vision; this tick-host parasitism occurred on Vancouver Island, BC. At an established population on mainland BC, Ixodes pacificus adults (7/15, 51%) were positive for Babesia odocoilei. We report the first Ixodes pacificus parasitizing a Mallard Duck, Anas platyrhynchos. Based on the findings of this tick-host-pathogen study, healthcare practitioners must be aware that at least 5 different Ixodes spp. transmit tick-borne zoonotic pathogens in BC. Babesia odocoilei does not respond to doxycycline treatment.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.268
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Research & Environmental SciencesSame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207