Comparison Between Animal Infectivity and Nucleic Acid Staining for Determination of Viability of Ozone-Inactivated<i>Cryptosporidium parvum Oocysts</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The viability of untreated and ozone treated Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts was determined using the nucleic acid dye SYTOO® staining evaluated by epi-fluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry. The use of microscopy to enumerate ozone treated oocysts, stained with SYTO-9, was found to either over- or underestimate the reduction in infectivity of parasites depending on the level of ozonation. Flow cytometry fluorescence histograms were generated for oocysts exposed to a range of ozone contact times. The median fluorescence intensity of ozone treated oocysts was found to be proportional to the reduction in mouse infectivity. A general linear regression model was fitted to the SYTO-9 staining data to give a predictive model for use with flow cytometry which provides a good estimate of the reduction in infectivity of C. parvum oocysts exposed to ozone in laboratory water.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".