Sampling bias created by ampicillin in isolation media for<i>Aeromonas</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of the bacterial genus Aeromonas are widely isolated from aquatic environments and studied in part for their ability to act as opportunistic pathogens in a variety of animals. All aeromonads, with the exception of Aeromonas trota, are generally thought to be resistant to ampicillin, so the antibiotic is frequently added to isolation medium as a selective agent. In this study, 282 aeromonads from environmental sources were isolated on a medium without ampicillin and their resistance to ampicillin determined. Of the 104 of these isolates that were judged to be independent (nonredundant), 18 (17.3%) were susceptible to ampicillin. A chi-square analysis was performed to determine the impact of ampicillin use on enumerating Aeromonas species from environmental samples. Our results indicate that, when ampicillin is used as a selective agent, a significant portion of the aeromonad population in at least some environments can be omitted from isolation.
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 | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".