Subtyping of <i>Salmonella enterica</i> Serotype Enteritidis Strains by Manual and Automated <i>Pst</i> I- <i>Sph</i> I Ribotyping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serotype Enteritidis is not readily subtyped beyond the level of phage type (PT). A recently developed method for ribotyping of this organism, which uses a mixture of PstI and SphI (PS) for restriction of DNA (PS ribotyping), has proved useful for further subtyping of a number of PTs of this organism, including PT 4. However, it has not been extensively tested with PT 8. In the present study the PS ribotyping method was used to investigate outbreaks of both S. enterica serotype Enteritidis PT 4 and PT 8 and provided subtyping data that were consistent with information obtained from epidemiologic investigations. The method proved to be more discriminatory than phage typing and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) combined and was useful for investigating a pseudo-outbreak involving isolates that had identical PTs and PFGE types but that could not be linked epidemiologically. Several PS ribotypes were found within the cluster of isolates indistinguishable by other subtyping methods, confirming the epidemiologic findings. Although the PS ribotyping method proved to have a superior discriminatory ability in resolving clusters, it did not have high enough throughput for use in outbreak investigations. This method has therefore been adapted for use in automated ribotyping with a RiboPrinter, and the results were compared with those obtained by manual ribotyping. Both methods produce equivalent results and are useful for obtaining epidemiologically relevant subtyping data for S. enterica serotype Enteritidis, including PT 8 strains not extensively tested previously.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".