Adsorption of<i>Mycobacterium avium</i>subsp.<i>paratuberculosis</i>to Soil Particles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attachment of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis to soil particles could increase their availability to farm animals, as well as influence the transportation of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis to water sources. To investigate the possibility of such attachment, we passed a known quantity of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis through chromatography columns packed with clay soil, sandy soil, pure silica, clay-silica mixture, or clay-silica complexes and measured the organisms recovered in the eluent using culture or quantitative PCR. Experiments were repeated using buffer at a range of pH levels with pure silica to investigate the effect of pH on M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis attachment. Linear mixed-model analyses were conducted to compare the proportional recovery of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis in the eluent between different substrates and pH levels. Of the organisms added to the columns, 83 to 100% were estimated to be retained in the columns after adjustment for those retained in empty control columns. The proportions recovered were significantly different across different substrates, with the retention being significantly greater (P < 0.05) in pure substrates (silica and clay-silica complexes) than in soil substrates (clay soil and sandy soil). However, there were no significant differences in the retention of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis between silica and clay-silica complexes or between clay soil and sandy soil. The proportion retained decreased with increasing pH in one of the experiments, indicating greater adsorption of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis to soil particles at an acidic pH (P < 0.05). The results suggest that under experimental conditions M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis adsorbs to a range of soil particles, and this attachment is influenced by soil pH.
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".