MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045209850 · doi:10.3168/jds.2010-3669

Assessment of an extraction protocol to detect the major mastitis-causing pathogens in bovine milk

2011· article· en· W2045209850 on OpenAlexafffund
B. Cressier, Nathalie Bissonnette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNovalaitAtlantic Veterinary CollegeUniversité de MontréalCanadian Dairy Commission
KeywordsStreptococcus dysgalactiaeMastitisStreptococcus uberisStreptococcus agalactiaeBiologyMicrobiologyKlebsiella oxytocaStaphylococcus aureusDNA extractionKlebsiella pneumoniaeBacteriaEscherichia coliStreptococcusPolymerase chain reaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite all efforts to control its spread, mastitis remains the most costly disease for dairy farmers worldwide. One key component of better control of this disease is identification of the causative bacterial agent during udder infections in cows. Mastitis is complex, however, given the diversity of pathogens that must be identified. Development of a rapid and efficient bacterial species identification tool is thus necessary. This study was conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of bacterial DNA extraction for the automated molecular detection of major mastitis-causing pathogens directly in milk samples to complement traditional microbiological identification. Extraction and detection procedures were designed and optimized to achieve detection in a respectable time frame, at a reasonable cost, and with a high throughput capacity. The following species were identified: Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus uberis, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus dysgalactiae, and Klebsiella spp. (including Klebsiella oxytoca and Klebsiella pneumoniae). The detection procedure includes specific genomic DNA amplification by multiplex PCR for each species, separation by capillary electrophoresis, and laser-assisted automated detection. The specificity of the primers was assessed with a panel of bacteria representing mastitis-negative control species. The extraction protocol comprised multiple steps, starting with centrifugation for fat removal, followed by heating in the presence of a cation exchange resin to trap divalent ions. The analytical sensitivity was 100 cfu/mL for milk samples spiked with Staph. aureus, Strep. dysgalactiae, and E. coli, with a tendency for K. pneumoniae. The detection limit was 500 cfu/mL for Strep. uberis and Strep. agalactiae. The overall diagnostic sensitivity (95.4%) and specificity (97.3%) were determined in a double-blind randomized assay by processing 172 clinical milk samples with microbiological characterization as the gold standard. When the physical nature of the milk samples was too altered, DNA purification with a magnetic bead-based system was used. Of the apparent false-positive samples, 5 were identified by specific microbiological analysis as true-positive Staph. aureus co-infections, with further confirmation by ribosomal 16S sequencing. The proposed methodology could, therefore, become an interesting tool for automated PCR detection of major mastitis pathogens in dairy cattle.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations37
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207