MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033415489 · doi:10.1017/s0950268803001225

Verotoxins in commensal <i>Escherichia coli</i> in cattle: the effect of injectable subcutaneous oxytetracycline in addition to in-feed chlortetracycline on prevalence

2004· article· en· W2033415489 on OpenAlexaff
Annette M. O’Connor, Kim Ziebell, C. Poppe, Scott A. McEwen

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Infection · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEscherichia coli research studies
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOxytetracyclineChlortetracyclineEscherichia coliBiologyFecesMultiplex polymerase chain reactionVeterinary medicineMicrobiologyPolymerase chain reactionAntibioticsAnimal scienceMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a self-paired observational study, the association between therapeutic oxytetracycline use and the prevalence of virulence genes in commensal Escherichia coli (E. coli) from cattle was examined. Faeces were collected from 39 yearling bulls prior to and after treatment with oxytetracycline and from 44 untreated animals. Between samplings all animals received in-feed chlortetracycline for 16 days. Five E. coli were isolated from each sample and tested by a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) capable of detecting all verotoxin (vt) genes. Positive isolates were further tested with a multiplex PCR to detect vt1, vt2, eaeA and hlyA. For vt, 23 animals were positive at both samplings, 26 negative at both samplings, 22 negative animals became positive and 12 positive animals became negative. Sixty-eight per cent of the discordant pairs changed from vt-negative to vt-positive (95% CI 48-80) suggesting pressure toward becoming vt-positive perhaps due to the transfer of genes due to mixing of cattle in the months between samplings or an effect of chlortetracycline.

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)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and InfectionSame topicEscherichia coli research studiesFrench-language works237,207