MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996453648 · doi:10.1021/es060659q

Spatial and Annual Variability in Concentrations and Sources of <i>Escherichia coli</i> in Multiple Watersheds

2006· article· en· W1996453648 on OpenAlexaff
Cindy L. Meays, Klaas Broersma, Rick Nordin, Asit Mazumder, Mansour Samadpour

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEscherichia coliEnvironmental scienceSpatial variabilityHydrology (agriculture)BiologyStatisticsMathematicsGeologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonpoint source fecal contamination is a concern for drinking water supplies worldwide. In this study, 4812 E. coli isolates were classified to source. Results of this experiment show that the fecal coliform (FC) counts varied by year, month, and site, for each of the watersheds sampled. For both years, the lowest FC counts tended to be at the highest elevation sites followed by the drinking water intake sites at the lowest elevation. The highest FC counts tended to be at the mid-elevation sites on BX, Deer, and Duteau Creeks. The sources of E. coli varied significantly with stream for 2003 and 2004 (P < 0.001, df = 39), although the main sources of E. coli (avian, deer/elk, canine, rodent, bovine, and bear) tended to be similar between watersheds. The dominant sources of E. coli changed from 2003 (avian, deer/elk, and canine) to 2004 (avian, bovine, and rodent). It is important to look at the results of more than 1 year of source tracking data to get a better picture of the dominant sources within a watershed. Overall, wildlife was the largest contributor of E. coli to the watersheds in both 2003 (> 84%) and 2004 (> 73%).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations35
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207