Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Aquatic Bacteria: Quality Control Disk Diffusion Ranges for <i>Escherichia coli</i> ATCC 25922 and <i>Aeromonas salmonicida</i> subsp. <i>salmonicida</i> ATCC 33658 at 22 and 28°C
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quality control (QC) ranges for disk diffusion susceptibility testing of aquatic bacterial isolates were proposed as a result of a multilaboratory study conducted according to procedures established by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). Ranges were proposed for Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 and Aeromonas salmonicida subsp. salmonicida ATCC 33658 at 22 and 28 degrees C for nine different antimicrobial agents (ampicillin, enrofloxacin, erythromycin, florfenicol, gentamicin, oxolinic acid, oxytetracycline, ormetoprim-sulfadimethoxine, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole). All tests were conducted on standard Mueller-Hinton agar. With >/=95% of all data points fitting within the proposed QC ranges, the results from this study comply with NCCLS guidelines and have been accepted by the NCCLS Subcommittee for Veterinary Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. These QC guidelines will permit greater accuracy in interpreting results and, for the first time, the ability to reliably compare susceptibility test data between aquatic animal disease diagnostic laboratories.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".