MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2499855697 · doi:10.1111/zph.12295

Molecular and Statistical Analysis of <i>Campylobacter</i> spp. and Antimicrobial‐Resistant <i>Campylobacter</i> Carriage in Wildlife and Livestock from Ontario Farms

2016· article· en· W2499855697 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mohan Viswanathan, David L. Pearl, Eduardo N. Taboada, E. Jane Parmley, Steven K. Mutschall, Claire M. Jardine

Bibliographic record

VenueZoonoses and Public Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaCanadian Food Inspection AgencyUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsCampylobacterCampylobacter jejuniCampylobacter coliLivestockVeterinary medicineBiologyCarriageCampylobacteriosisWildlifeAntibiotic resistanceCampylobacter fetusMicrobiologyGeographyMedicineAntibioticsBacteriaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this study were to (i) compare the carriage of Campylobacter and antimicrobial-resistant Campylobacter among livestock and mammalian wildlife on Ontario farms, and (ii) investigate the potential sharing of Campylobacter subtypes between livestock and wildlife. Using data collected from a cross-sectional study of 25 farms in 2010, we assessed associations, using mixed logistic regression models, between Campylobacter and antimicrobial-resistant Campylobacter carriage and the following explanatory variables: animal species (beef, dairy, swine, raccoon, other), farm type (swine, beef, dairy), type of sample (livestock or wildlife) and Campylobacter species (jejuni, coli, other). Models included a random effect to account for clustering by farm where samples were collected. Samples were subtyped using a Campylobacter-specific 40 gene comparative fingerprinting assay. A total of 92 livestock and 107 wildlife faecal samples were collected, and 72% and 27% tested positive for Campylobacter, respectively. Pooled faecal samples from livestock were significantly more likely to test positive for Campylobacter than wildlife samples. Relative to dairy cattle, pig samples were at significantly increased odds of testing positive for Campylobacter. The odds of isolating Campylobacter jejuni from beef cattle samples were significantly greater compared to dairy cattle and raccoon samples. Fifty unique subtypes of Campylobacter were identified, and only one subtype was found in both wildlife and livestock samples. Livestock Campylobacter isolates were significantly more likely to exhibit antimicrobial resistance (AMR) compared to wildlife Campylobacter isolates. Campylobacter jejuni was more likely to exhibit AMR when compared to C. coli. However, C. jejuni isolates were only resistant to tetracycline, and C. coli isolates exhibited multidrug resistance patterns. Based on differences in prevalence of Campylobacter spp. and resistant Campylobacter between livestock and wildlife samples, and the lack of similarity in molecular subtypes and AMR patterns, we concluded that the sharing of Campylobacter species between livestock and mammalian wildlife was uncommon.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZoonoses and Public HealthSame topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiologyFrench-language works237,207