Comparison of Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase (ESBL) CTX-M Genotypes in Franklin Gulls from Canada and Chile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migratory birds have been suggested to contribute to long-distance dispersal of antimicrobial resistant bacteria, but tests of this hypothesis are lacking. In this study we determined resistance profiles and genotypes of ESBL-producing bacteria in randomly selected Escherichia coli from Franklin´s gulls (Leucophaeus pipixcan) at breeding sites in Canada and compared with similar data from the gulls' wintering grounds in Chile. Resistant E. coli phenotypes were common, most notably to ampicillin (30.1%) and cefadroxil (15.1%). Furthermore, 17.0% of the gulls in Canada carried ESBL producing bacteria, which is higher than reported from human datasets from the same country. However, compared to gulls sampled in Chile (30.1%) the prevalence of ESBL was much lower. The dominant ESBL variants in Canada were blaCTX-M-14 and blaCTX-M-15 and differed in proportions to the data from Chile. We hypothesize that the observed differences in ESBL variants are more likely linked to recent exposure to bacteria from anthropogenic sources, suggesting high local dissemination of resistant bacteria both at breeding and non-breeding times rather than a significant trans-hemispheric exchange through migrating birds.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".