CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Bhanja virus

Species of virus

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 6, 2025
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

The Bhanja virus is a tick-borne virus first discovered in a tick taken from a paralyzed goat in Bhanjanagar, India in 1954. Bhanja virus in humans was first documented in 1974 when Charles Calisher was working with the virus in a lab and contracted it himself. His experience with the virus was mild and included symptoms of mild aching in muscles and joints, moderate headache, slight photophobia. The Bhanja virus is a member of the Bhanja virus serocomplex and is a member of the Bunyavirales order.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Bhanja virus” as species of virus. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewUseful for establishing the present vocabulary of the subject while preserving a route back to the evidence on which that vocabulary rests. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1954, 1974—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Bhanja, virus and Species can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of virus. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 6, 2025. The first chronological checks are 1954 and 1974.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Bhanja virus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Bhanja virus primary sources, Bhanja virus archive and Bhanja research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bhanja virus”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Bhanja virus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.