Genetic analysis of Bordetella pertussis in Ontario, Canada reveals one predominant clone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize Bordetella pertussis isolates in Ontario, Canada in order to understand the clonal diversity of strains present in this province. METHODS: A total of 521 isolates from the period 1998-2006 were analyzed by serotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and DNA sequencing of their virulence factors of pertactin, fimbriae 3, pertussis toxin subunit 1, and pertussis toxin gene promoter. Characteristics of the Ontario isolates were compared to those described for isolates from Europe and Australia. RESULTS: A single predominant clone was identified in Ontario, Canada, represented by 83.5% of the 521 isolates analyzed. This clone was characterized by the genotype fim3B, prn2, ptxS1A, and ptxP3 (sequence type (ST)-1), and 72.9% of this clone displayed three closely related PFGE profiles of BpSR11, BpSR5, and BpSR12. Pertussis isolates in Europe with these PFGE profiles and virulence factor genotype are reported as common. The Australian epidemic clone was previously reported to have the genotype prn2 and ptxP3. CONCLUSION: The finding of one predominant B. pertussis clone in Ontario, Canada, with characteristics identical to strains involved in epidemics in Europe and Australia, suggests a potential link of this strain to the resurgence of pertussis in this province.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".