MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1979667637 · doi:10.2166/wst.2009.656

Choice of indicator organism and library size considerations for phenotypic microbial source tracking by FAME profiling

2009· article· en· W1979667637 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Metin Duran, Deniz Yurtsever, Timur Dunaev

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control
KeywordsBiologyEnterococcusVeterinary medicineFecesFecal coliformMicrobiologyIndicator organismEscherichia coliEcologyGeneticsGeneAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary objective of this study was to investigate the effects of choice of the indicator organisms on the accuracy of classifying the fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) profiles of the known-source library isolates. First, a known-source library containing the FAME profiles of Enterococcus isolates cultured from six different possible sources of microbial pollution was developed. A total of 511 Enterococcus isolates were profiled: 120 isolates from sewage samples representing humans; 69 from dairy and cattle cow; 74 from chicken; 76 from swine; 94 from deer; and 78 from waterfowl. Classification of known-source Enterococcus isolates into their respective host categories resulted with a 66% average rate of correct classification (ARCC) in a six-way discriminant analysis (DA). The ARCC increased to 75% when the individual hosts were pooled into larger categories of human, livestock, and wildlife. The accuracy was 80% when isolates of human origin were discriminated against those of non-human origins. Recently, several studies reported the ARCCs for various classification schemes associated with total coliform (TC), fecal coliform (FC), and Escherichia coli of the known-source isolates. When the accuracy of classification of Enterococcus isolates was compared to those reported for TC, FC, and E. coli isolates, the lowest ARCCs were associated with classification of E. coli isolates, the only species level indicator organism among the four compared. It was found that the degree of discrimination increases as the indicator becomes more inclusive of bacteria from different genus. In addition, random cluster formation analysis indicates that known-source libraries with isolate numbers between 300 and 500 might be sufficient for MST by FAME.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & Technology→Same topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology→French-language works237,207→