Endemic bacteriophages: a cautionary tale for evaluation of bacteriophage therapy and other interventions for infection control in animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One of the most effective targets for control of zoonotic foodborne pathogens in the farm to fork continuum is their elimination in food animals destined for market. Phage therapy for Escherichia coli O157:H7 in ruminants, the main animal reservoir of this pathogen, is a popular research topic. Since phages active against this pathogen may be endemic in host animals and their environment, they may emerge during trials of phage therapy or other interventions, rendering interpretation of trials problematic. METHODS: During separate phage therapy trials, sheep and cattle inoculated with 109 to 1010 CFU of E. coli O157:H7 soon began shedding phages dissimilar in plaque morphology to the administered therapeutic phages. None of the former was previously identified in the animals or in their environment. The dissimilar "rogue" phage was isolated and characterized by host range, ultrastructure, and genomic and proteomic analyses. RESULTS: The "rogue" phage (Phage vB_EcoS_Rogue1) is distinctly different from the administered therapeutic Myoviridae phages, being a member of the Siphoviridae (head: 53 nm; striated tail: 152x8 nm). It has a 45.8 kb genome which is most closely related to coliphage JK06, a member of the "T1-like viruses" isolated in Israel. Detailed bioinformatic analysis reveals that the tail of these phages is related to the tail genes of coliphage lambda. The presence of "rogue" phages resulting from natural enrichments can pose problems in the interpretation of phage therapeutic studies. Similarly, evaluation of any interventions for foodborne or other bacterial pathogens in animals may be compromised unless tests for such phages are included to identify their presence and potential impact.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".