Identification of Campylobacter spp. and discrimination from Helicobacter and Arcobacter spp. by direct sequencing of PCR-amplified cpn60 sequences and comparison to cpnDB, a chaperonin reference sequence database
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A robust method for the identification of Campylobacter spp. based on direct sequencing of PCR-amplified partial cpn60 sequences and comparison of these to a reference database of cpn60 sequences is reported. A total of 53 Campylobacter isolates, representing 15 species, were identified and distinguished from phenotypically similar Helicobacter and Arcobacter strains. Pairwise cpn60 sequence identities between Campylobacter spp. ranged from 71 to 92 %, with most between 71 and 79 %, making discrimination of these species obvious. The method described overcomes limitations of existing PCR-based methods, which require time-consuming and complex post-amplification steps such as the cloning of amplification products. The results of this study demonstrate the potential for use of the reference chaperonin sequence database, cpnDB, as a tool for identification of bacterial isolates based on cpn60 sequences amplified with universal primers.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it