MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754117488 · doi:10.5006/c2017-09420

Molecular MIC Diagnoses from ATP Field Test: Streamlined Workflow from Field to 16S rRNA Gene Metagenomics Results

2017· article· en· W2754117488 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Demeter, Shawna Johnston, Kim Dockens, Raymond J. Turner

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetagenomicsWorkflow16S ribosomal RNAComputational biologyRibosomal RNABiologyGeneComputer scienceGeneticsDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) describes the negative impacts of microbial growth within various industries. While culture based growth tests are the traditional means of assessing MIC, they are not accurate. New culture-independent assays have been developed; one of which is the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) assay. This field assay allows for indirect enumeration of microorganisms; however, it does not divulge which microorganisms are present. Molecular methods such as 16S metagenomics (16S rRNA gene sequencing and data interpretation) are often used for characterizing the microbial populations; however, it has not been widely adopted due to prohibitive costs and complex workflows that are not feasible in the field. Microbial communities are highly sensitive to changes in their environment, and change in composition as a result of sample storage, transport, and handling, ultimately diminishing the quality of the knowledge gained from sequencing the community. Recently, the presence of microbial DNA in physical elements (filter and filtrate) of the ATP assay were found, suggesting the ATP assay itself may be used to acquire DNA for metagenomic analyses in the field. The ability to bundle the ATP MIC diagnostic assay with DNA acquisition for metagenomics would reduce the cost and labor intensity of DNA extraction, and alleviate complex sample storage and handling logistics that together may substantially improve resultant molecular assay accuracy and accessibility to the industry.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.011

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207