Comparison of cultural and analytical methods for determination of aflatoxin production by Mississippi Delta<i>Aspergillus</i>isolates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared cultural and analytical methods for detecting aflatoxin production by Aspergillus species. Aspergillus isolates were obtained from various Mississippi Delta crops (corn, peanut, rice, cotton) and soils. Most of the isolates (99%) were A. flavus and the remainder comprised A. parasiticus and A. nomius. The following three cultural methods were evaluated on potato dextrose agar: fluorescence (FL) on beta-cyclodextrin-containing media (CD), yellow pigment (YP) formation in mycelium and medium, and color change after ammonium hydroxide vapor exposure (AV). Aflatoxins in culture extracts were confirmed by thin-layer chromatography (TLC) and quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Of the 517 isolates, 314 produced greater than 20 ng/g of total aflatoxin based on ELISA, and 180 produced greater than 10 000 ng/g of aflatoxin in the medium. Almost all the toxigenic isolates (97%) were confirmed by TLC as producers. Of the toxigenic isolates, as determined by ELISA, 93%, 73%, and 70% gave positive FL, YP, and AV responses, respectively. Of the 203 isolates producing less than 20 ng/g of aflatoxin, 20%, 6%, and 0% of respective FL, YP, and AV methods gave false-positive responses. The 9% false-positive results from TLC fall within this range. This study showed good agreement among all tested cultural methods. However, these cultural techniques did not detect aflatoxin in all cultures that were found to produce aflatoxins by ELISA, LC/MS, and TLC. The best results were obtained when the AV color change and CD fluorescence methods were used together, yielding an overall success rate comparable to TLC but without the need for chemical extraction and the time and expense of TLC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".