MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126319504 · doi:10.1111/jeu.12229

Isolation and Molecular Characterization of <i>Acanthamoeba</i> Strains from Dental Units in Costa Rica

2015· article· en· W2126319504 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lissette Retana Moreira, Elizabeth Abrahams‐Sandí, Esteban Castro‐Artavia, Ana María Fernández-Sánchez, Alfredo Castro‐Castillo, María Reyes-Batllé, Jacob Lorenzo‐Morales

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLegionella and Acanthamoeba research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de Costa RicaInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIMinistry of Health, British Columbia“la Caixa” Foundation
KeywordsAcanthamoebaBiologyGenotypingProtozoaNaegleriaIsolation (microbiology)MicrobiologyGenotypePathogenicityGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free-living amoebae are protozoa widely distributed in nature, which can be found in a variety of environments. Four genera are recognized as causal agents of infections in humans and animals: Acanthamoeba, Naegleria, Balamuthia, and Sappinia. In this study, the presence of Acanthamoeba in dental units was determined and the isolates obtained were molecularly characterized; osmotolerance and thermotolerance assays were also performed to evaluate multiplication under these conditions, frequently associated with pathogenicity. The morphological analysis and partial sequencing of the 18S rDNA gene revealed the presence of Acanthamoeba genotype T4 in 14% of the units sampled. Osmotolerance and thermotolerance tests were positive for more than 80% of the isolates. Up to date, this is the first study that reports the detection, identification, and genotyping of Acanthamoeba isolated from dental units in Costa Rica and even in Latin-America. Further assays to determine the potential pathogenicity of these Acanthamoeba isolates are underway.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologySame topicLegionella and Acanthamoeba researchFrench-language works237,207