<i>Listeria monocytogenes</i> Serotype Identification by PCR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Serotyping is a universally accepted subtyping method for Listeria monocytogenes. Identification of the strain serotype permits differentiation between important food-borne strains (1/2a, 1/2b, and 4b) and provides a "gold standard" for comparing isolates analyzed in different labs and with different techniques. Although an efficient enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay serotyping protocol was described recently, identification of PCR serotyping primers would further increase the ease and accessibility of this classification system. Serotyping PCR primers were designed from variable regions of the L. monocytogenes genome. Three primer sets were used in conjunction with a previously described Division III primer set in order to classify 122 L. monocytogenes strains into five serotype groups [1/2a(3a), 1/2b, 1/2c(3c), 4b(d,e), and 4a/c]. Results of the PCR method agreed with those of the conventional slide agglutination method for 97, 100, 94, and 91% of strains belonging to serotypes 1/2a, 1/2b, 1/2c, and 4b, respectively.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
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".