MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317113108 · doi:10.1139/w2012-060

Adaptation of a real-time PCR method for the detection and quantification of pathogenic leptospires in environmental water

2012· article· en· W2317113108 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julie Vein, Aurélie Perrin, Philippe Berny, Etienne Benoît, Agnès Leblond, Angéli Kodjo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicLeptospirosis research and findings
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeptospiraLeptospirosisPathogenic bacteriaBiologyIsolation (microbiology)SYBR Green IDNA extractionReal-time polymerase chain reactionBacteriaMicrobiologyPolymerase chain reactionVirologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leptospirosis is a major zoonotic disease that affects humans and animals in all continents, in both rural and urban areas. In Europe, metropolitan France is the most affected country, with about 300 human cases declared per year. In France, although leptospirosis is now mostly considered as a recreational disease related to freshwater areas, isolation of pathogenic leptospires from environmental water samples still remains difficult. It thus seemed important to set up an efficient method to detect and quantify these bacteria in this environment. We determined a DNA extraction method suitable for freshwater samples and adapted a real-time quantitative PCR based on the detection of the LipL32 gene using the SYBR green chemistry. The method developed is specific for pathogenic Leptospira. It permits the detection of all the pathogenic strains tested and none of the saprophytic strains. Quantification is possible between 10 and 10(7) bacteria/mL, and therefore, the method represents a tool that could be integrated into future public health surveillance programs for recreational freshwater areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicLeptospirosis research and findingsFrench-language works237,207