Investigation of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci and The Distribution of The Vancomycin Resistance Associated Genes in Chickens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, chicken litter and cloacal swabs (n=300) were investigated for the detection of vancomycin-resistant enterococci and determination of resistance associated genes. The samples were cultured in Enterococcocel broth and on Enterococcocel agar. One hundred seven presumptive isolates were examined by PCR at the genus level. For the determination of vancomycin resistance of Enterococcus spp. isolates (n=98), disc diffusion and macro dilution methods were performed. According to disc diffusion test, 49 isolates were resistant and 48 were intermediate and according to the macro-dilution tests, 5 of the isolates were found to be resistant (MIC≥64 μg/ml), 83 of them were intermediate (MIC = 8-16 μg/ml) and 9 of them susceptible (MIC≤4 μg/ml). Vancomycin resistant and intermediate isolates were examined for detection of MIC value for teicoplan (n=88); 2 were resistant (MIC≥32 μg/ml) and 86 susceptible (MIC≤8 μg/ml). Finally, vancomycin resistant and intermediate isolates were examined by PCR for the detection of vancomycin resistance associated genes and identification at species level by PCR. As a result of PCR, 5 of the isolates were vanA gene carrying E. faecium , 29 were E. gallinarum with vanC1 gene and 54 were E. casseliflavus with vanC2 /3 gene.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".