MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020185882 · doi:10.5942/jawwa.2012.104.0007

Distribution systems as reservoirs of <i>Naegleria fowleri</i> and other amoebae

2011· article· en· W2020185882 on OpenAlexaff
Precious Biyela, Hodon Ryu, Albert F. Brown, Absar Alum, Morteza Abbaszadegan, Bruce E. Rittmann

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLegionella and Acanthamoeba research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersBiodesign Institute, Arizona State UniversityArizona State University
KeywordsNaegleria fowleriNaegleriaBiofilmMicrobiologyBiologyAcanthamoebaLegionellaAmoeba (genus)MeningoencephalitisBacteriaVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Naegleria fowleri is the etiologic agent of primary amoebic meningoencephalitis (PAM), a rapidly fatal disease. Although PAM generally occurs after recreational exposure to contaminated water, two fatal cases of PAM were linked to a drinking water supply in Arizona. This study tested the ability of distribution system biofilms to be reservoirs for N. fowleri and other amoebae. When introduced to laboratory pipe loops, N. fowleri attached to biofilms and survived for five months. In two fullscale distribution systems, amoebic activity was detected in 67% of biofilm samples tested, regardless of chlorination. Amoebic activity occurred mostly in locations associated with stagnant water and high bacterial counts. Legionella was also found in 65% of biofilm samples. Although N. fowleri was never detected in field samples, the observed risk factors—high bacterial counts, amoebic activity, and the presence of Legionella in biofilms—suggest that N. fowleri could thrive in both systems if introduced.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Water Works AssociationSame topicLegionella and Acanthamoeba researchFrench-language works237,207