MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2269766500

Determining Sources of Fecal Pollution in Water for a Rural Virginia Community

2000· dissertation· en· W2269766500 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexandria K. Graves

Bibliographic record

VenueVTechWorks (Virginia Tech) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutionEnvironmental scienceFecal coliformWater pollutionEnvironmental planningGeographyWater resource managementHydrology (agriculture)Environmental engineeringWater qualityEngineeringEnvironmental chemistryChemistryEcologyGeotechnical engineeringBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This project involves developing and applying bacterial source tracking (BST) methodology to determine sources of fecal pollution in water for a rural community (Millwood, VA). Antibiotic resistance analysis (ARA) is the primary BST method for fecal source identification, followed by randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis for confirmation. Millwood consists of 66 homes, all served by individual septic systems, and a stream (Spout Run) passes through the center of the community. Spout Run drains a 5,800 ha karst topography watershed that includes large populations of livestock and wildlife. Stream and well samples were collected monthly and analyzed for fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci, starting in 5/99 and ending in 5/00. Twelve percent of the well samples and 92% of the stream samples were positive for fecal coliforms, and 26% of the stream samples exceeded the recreational water standard (1,000 fecal coliforms/100 ml). ARA of fecal streptococci recovered from the stream samples indicated that isolates of human origin appeared throughout the stream as the stream passed through Millwood with a yearly average of (approx. 10% human, 30% wildlife, and 63% livestock), and the percent human origin isolates declined downstream from Millwood. These results were obtained by comparing the antibiotic resistance profiles of stream isolates against a library of 1,174 known source isolates with correct classification rates of 94.6% for human isolates, 93.7% for livestock isolates, and 87.8% for wildlife isolates. There is a human signature in Spout Run, but it is small compared to the proportion of isolates from livestock and wildlife. The sporadic instances where well water samples were positive appeared primarily during very dry periods. Restricting livestock access to streams can dramatically lower fecal coliform counts during the unusually hot and dry periods. Reducing FC counts to below recreational water standards for Virginia (1000 per 100ml for any one sample) may be achievable, however to maintain streams below standards may prove to be difficult, as Spout Run is in an area where there are large populations of Canada geese, deer, and other wildlife, and will be hard to restrict these animals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVTechWorks (Virginia Tech)Same topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207