Coherence among Different Microbial Source Tracking Markers in a Small Agricultural Stream with or without Livestock Exclusion Practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over 1,400 water samples were collected biweekly over 6 years from an intermittent stream protected and unprotected from pasturing cattle. The samples were monitored for host-specific Bacteroidales markers, Cryptosporidium species/genotypes, viruses and coliphages associated with humans or animals, and bacterial zoonotic pathogens. Ruminant Bacteroidales markers did not increase within the restricted cattle access reach of the stream, whereas the ruminant Bacteroidales marker increased significantly in the unrestricted cattle access reach. Human Bacteroidales markers significantly increased downstream of homes where septic issues were documented. Wildlife Bacteroidales markers were detected downstream of the cattle exclusion practice where stream and riparian habitat was protected, but detections decreased after the unrestricted pasture, where the stream and riparian zone was unprotected from livestock. Detection of a large number of human viruses was shown to increase downstream of homes, and similar trends were observed for the human Bacteroidales marker. There was considerable interplay among biomarkers with stream flow, season, and the cattle exclusion practices. There were no to very weak associations with Bacteroidales markers and bacterial, viral, and parasitic pathogens. Overall, discrete sample-by-sample coherence among the different microbial source tracking markers that expressed a similar microbial source was minimal, but spatial trends were physically meaningful in terms of land use (e.g., beneficial management practice) effects on sources of fecal pollution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".