Evaluation of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests and culture for determining <i>Salmonella</i> status of a pig herd
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate Salmonella ELISA tests and a culture technique to determine Salmonella status using samples collected from commercial herds. Faecal samples from 15 finisher pigs on each of 40 swine farms were cultured for Salmonella. Sera from the same 600 pigs were analysed for the presence of antibodies to Salmonella by means of two different ELISA kits Salmotype (Salmotype Labordiagnostik, Leipzig, Germany) and IDEXX (Herdchek* Salmonella; IDEXX Laboratories, Schiphol-Rijk, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands). The Salmotype ELISA test demonstrated a moderate ability to differentiate culture-positive pigs from culture-negative pigs while IDEXX was relatively poor in classifying those pigs correctly (The area under the curves were 0.79 and 0.65 for Salmotype and IDEXX respectively). The maximum value of sensitivity plus specificity was gained at the cut-off optical density (OD) > or =25% for Salmotype (sensitivity 0.65, specificity 0.84) and at the OD > or =9% for IDEXX (sensitivity 0.59, specificity 0.69). The maximum herd sensitivity and herd specificity was 0.64 (95% CI 0.49-0.79) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.59-0.86) for the Salmotype test and 0.73 (95% CI 0.59-0.87) and 0.62 (95% CI 0.47-0.77) for the IDEXX. Culture and the ELISA tests showed fair agreement at the herd level (kappa=0.3, P<0.05). Likewise there was significant disagreement between the two ELISA tests at the pig level, but very good agreement between the two ELISA tests (kappa=0.8, P<0.0001) at the herd level. The coating antigens in Salmotype and IDEXX represent only 48% of the antigens of Salmonella isolated in our study and need to be revised based upon the Salmonella serovar distribution in Ontario.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".