MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117455630 · doi:10.1128/jcm.01513-06

Temperate Bacteriophages Affect Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis Patterns of <i>Campylobacter jejuni</i>

2006· article· en· W2117455630 on OpenAlexaffabout
Connie Barton, Lai-King Ng, Shaun Tyler, Clifford G. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health Agency of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacteriophagePulsed-field gel electrophoresisBiologyCampylobacter jejuniGel electrophoresisMicrobiologyOutbreakSouthern blotCampylobacterGeneVirologyGeneticsMolecular biologyGenotypeBacteriaEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recently sequenced genome of Campylobacter jejuni RM1221 revealed the presence of three integrated bacteriophage-like elements. In this study, genes from the first element, a Mu-like bacteriophage, were amplified by PCR and used to probe pulsed-field gels of clinical C. jejuni strains obtained from a waterborne outbreak (Ontario, Canada, 2000). These highly similar strains differed only by their pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) patterns due to an apparent insertion or deletion of a 40-kb fragment. Bacteriophage probes hybridized to these different bands in Southern blot analysis, indicating that homologues of bacteriophage genes were present in the outbreak strains. Investigation of the bacteriophage insertion sites in these isolates suggested that bacteriophage acquisition, loss, or transposition was responsible for the PFGE pattern variation. The bacteriophage gene sequences were similar, but not identical, in the outbreak strains and RM1221, indicating that differences may exist between the bacteriophages.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations45
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MicrobiologySame topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207