MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000300812 · doi:10.1128/aem.07192-11

Comparison of Gull Feces-Specific Assays Targeting the 16S rRNA Genes of Catellicoccus marimammalium and Streptococcus spp

2012· article· en· W2000300812 on OpenAlexafffund
Hodon Ryu, John F. Griffith, Izhar U. H. Khan, Stephen J. Hill, Thomas A. Edge, Carlos Toledo‐Hernández, Joel Gonzalez-Nieves, Jorge Santo Domingo

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Environmental Microbiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsFecesBiologyTaqMan16S ribosomal RNAPolymerase chain reactionMicrobiologyBacteriaGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two novel gull-specific quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays were developed using 16S rRNA gene sequences from gull fecal clone libraries: a SYBR green assay targeting Streptococcus spp. (gull3) and a hydrolysis TaqMan assay targeting Catellicoccus marimammalium (gull4). The objectives of this study were to compare the host specificity of a previous C. marimammalium qPCR assay (gull2) with that of the new markers and to examine the presence of the three gull markers in environmental water samples from different geographic locations. Most of the gull fecal samples tested (n = 255) generated positive signals with the gull2 and gull4 assays (i.e., >86%), whereas only 28% were positive with gull3. Low prevalence and abundance of tested gull markers (0.6 to 15%) were observed in fecal samples from six nonavian species (n = 180 fecal samples), whereas the assays cross-reacted to some extent (13 to 31%) with other (nongull) avian fecal samples. The gull3 assay was positive against fecal samples from 11 of 15 avian species, including gull. Of the presumed gull-impacted water samples (n = 349), 86%, 59%, and 91% were positive with the gull2, the gull3, and the gull4 assays, respectively. Approximately 5% of 239 non-gull-impacted water samples were positive with the gull2 and the gull4 assays, whereas 21% were positive witg the gull3 assay. While the relatively high occurrence of gull2 and gull4 markers in waters impacted by gull feces suggests that these assays could be used in environmental monitoring studies, the data also suggest that multiple avian-specific assays will be needed to accurately assess the contribution of different avian sources in recreational waters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations72
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Environmental MicrobiologySame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207