MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030808268 · doi:10.1128/aem.07661-11

Characterization of Bioaerosols from Dairy Barns: Reconstructing the Puzzle of Occupational Respiratory Diseases by Using Molecular Approaches

2012· article· en· W2030808268 on OpenAlexaff
Pascale Blais Lecours, Marc Veillette, David Marsolais, Caroline Duchaine

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Environmental Microbiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioaerosolIndoor bioaerosolBiologyMicrobiomeMicrobiology16S ribosomal RNABiotechnologyVeterinary medicineBacteriaEcologyMedicineChemistryBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To understand the etiology of exposure-related diseases and to establish standards for reducing the risks associated with working in contaminated environments, the exact nature of the bioaerosol components must be defined. Molecular biology tools were used to evaluate airborne bacterial and, for the first time, archaeal content of dairy barns. Three air samplers were tested in each of the 13 barns sampled. Up to 10(6) archaeal and 10(8) bacterial 16S rRNA genes per m(3) of air were detected. Archaeal methanogens, mainly Methanobrevibacter species, were represented. Saccharopolyspora rectivirgula, the causative agent of farmer's lung, was quantified to up to 10(7) 16S rRNA genes per m(3) of air. In addition, a wide variety of bacterial agents were present in our air samples within the high airborne bioaerosol concentration range. Despite recommendations regarding hay preservation and baling conditions, farmers still develop an S. rectivirgula-specific humoral immune response, suggesting intense and continuous exposure. Our results demonstrate the complexity of bioaerosol components in dairy barns which could play a role in occupational respiratory diseases.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

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

Citations68
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Environmental MicrobiologySame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207