Comparative evaluation of a chromogenic agar medium – PCR protocol with a conventional method for isolation of Vibrio parahaemolyticus strains from environmental and clinical samples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Screening for pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus has become routine in certain areas associated with food-borne outbreaks. This study is an evaluation of the CHROMagar Vibrio (CV) medium-PCR protocol and the conventional method (TCBS (thiosulfate-citrate-bile salts-sucrose) agar plus biochemical and Wagatsuma agar tests) for detection of V. parahaemolyticus in shrimp, water, sediment, and stool samples collected for biosurveillance in an endemic area of northwestern Mexico. A total of 131 environmental and clinical samples were evaluated. The CV medium-PCR protocol showed a significantly improved ability (P < 0.05) to isolate and detect V. parahaemolyticus, identifying isolates of this bacteria missed by the conventional method. Although some other bacteria, distinct from pathogenic V. parahaemolyticus, produced violet colonies similar to that of V. parahaemolyticus on CV medium, we were able to detect a superior number of samples of V. parahaemolyticus with the CV medium-PCR protocol than with the conventional method. The Kanagawa phenomenon is routinely determined on Wagatsuma agar for the diagnosis of V. parahaemolyticus (pathogenic) positive for thermostable direct hemolysin (TDH) in developing countries. In our results, Wagatsuma agar showed low sensitivity (65.4% at 24 h and 75.6% at 48 h) and specificity (52.4% at 48 h) for identifying V. parahaemolyticus positive for TDH. Overall, our data support the use of the CV medium-PCR protocol in place of the conventional method (TCBS-biochemical tests-Wagatsuma agar) for detection of pathogenic V. parahaemolyticus, both in terms of effectiveness and cost efficiency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".