Molecular epidemiology of <i>Legionella pneumophila</i> environmental isolates representing nine different serogroups determined by automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of the study were (i) to describe the abundance and epidemiology of Legionellaceae in the man-made environment in a northern Italian area, (ii) to assess the concordance between pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and automated ribotyping (AR) techniques for genotyping L. pneumophila and (iii) to investigate the correlation between serogrouping and genotyping data. Water was sampled from reservoirs in 12 buildings across an area of 80-km radius. Despite the water temperature always being maintained above 55 degrees C, all of the buildings sampled were contaminated with Legionellaceae on at least one occasion and 63 L. pneumophila isolates representing nine different serogroups were collected. The two DNA methods revealed a high degree of genetic heterogeneity, even though identical L. pneumophila clones were recovered at different sites. The AR technique provided a fairly reliable approximation of PFGE results (73% concordance), however there was poor correlation between serogrouping and genotyping data as identical DNA fingerprints were shared by isolates of different serogroups.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".