Isolation and preliminary characterization of a novel Helicobacter species from swine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a Helicobacter sp similar to Helicobacter pylori in the stomachs of humans could be isolated from the stomachs of pigs. ANIMALS: 4 young conventionally reared and 21 gnotobiotic pigs. PROCEDURE: Gastric mucosal homogenates (10% wt/vol) from 4 young conventionally reared pigs were cultured on Skirrow medium under microaerophilic conditions to assess the presence of Helicobacter spp. Colonies with morphologic features compatible with Helicobacter organisms were selected, tested for urease activity, and subpassaged on Skirrow medium. Isolates were examined via SDS-PAGE electrophoresis and reciprocal western blot analyses involving convalescent sera from monoinfected gnotobiotic pigs. RESULTS: Urease- and catalase-positive, gram-negative, microaerophilic, small, curved rod bacteria were isolated from the gastric mucosa of young healthy pigs. The first isolate (2662) was structurally and immunologically closely related to H pylori isolated from humans. The second isolate (1268) displayed an SDS-PAGE profile dissimilar to that of H pylori and isolate 2662, yet it shared limited immunologic cross-reactivity with these microbes. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Findings of this study indicate that development of gastric mucosal ulcers and ulceration of the nonglandular pars esophagea in pigs may be associated with gastric colonization by swine-origin Helicobacter spp, which are similar to H pylori isolated from humans.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".