MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic diversity of Escherichia coli recovered from the oral cavity of beef cattle and their relatedness to faecal E. coli

2004· article· en· W1977743819 on OpenAlexaff
Mueen Aslam, G.G. Greer, F.M. Nattress, C.O. Gill, Lynn M. McMullen

Bibliographic record

VenueLetters in Applied Microbiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEscherichia coli research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRAPDBiologyFeedlotFecesEscherichia coliPastureBeef cattleGenetic diversityVeterinary medicineGrazingPopulationMicrobiologyAnimal scienceEcologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To determine the genetic diversity of generic Escherichia coli recovered from the oral cavities of beef cattle and their relatedness to E. coli isolated from the faeces of cattle during pasture grazing and feedlot finishing. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 484 E. coli (248 oral and 236 faecal isolates) were obtained from eight beef cattle after 1 and 5 months of grazing on pasture and after 1 and 5 months in a feedlot. The random amplification of polymorphic DNA (RAPD) method was used to genetically characterize these isolates. The RAPD patterns showed that ca 60% of E. coli recovered from the oral cavities and faeces during pasture and feedlot shared a close genetic relatedness. A number of E. coli with unique RAPD types were also found either in the oral cavities or faeces. Most of the E. coli RAPD types recovered from the oral cavities were shared among animals, but there were also RAPD types which were unique to individual animals. The E. coli populations of the oral cavities were genetically diverse and changed over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that there are large numbers of E. coli carried in the oral cavities of beef cattle and those E. coli are closely related to strains found in the faeces. The oral cavities of cattle harbour a genetically diverse E. coli population. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The oral cavity may be an important reservoir of enteric pathogens which may transfer to meat during carcass dressing. A better understanding of the molecular ecology of E. coli in cattle would assist the design of approaches to control pathogenic strains during beef production and processing.

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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations17
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLetters in Applied MicrobiologySame topicEscherichia coli research studiesFrench-language works237,207