MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790266886 · doi:10.3390/toxins10030109

MycoKey Round Table Discussions of Future Directions in Research on Chemical Detection Methods, Genetics and Biodiversity of Mycotoxins

2018· article· en· W2790266886 on OpenAlexaff
John F. Leslie, Veronica M. T. Lattanzio, Kris Audenaert, Paola Battilani, Jeffrey W. Cary, S. Chulze, Sarah De Saeger, Annamaria Gerardino, Petr Karlovský, Yu‐Cai Liao, Chris M. Maragos, Giuseppe Meca, Ángel Medina, Antonio Moretti, Gary P. Munkvold, Giuseppina Mulè, Patrick Berka Njobeh, Ivan Pecorelli, Giancarlo Perrone, Amedeo Pietri, Juan Manuel Palazzini, Robert H. Proctor, Endang Sutriswati Rahayu, María Laura Ramirez, Robert A. Samson, Jörg Stroka, Michael Sulyok, Mark W. Sumarah, Cees Waalwijk, Qi Zhang, Hao Zhang, Antonio Logrieco

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsMicrobiomeBiodiversityProtocol (science)Focus groupData scienceBiotechnologyBiologyComputer scienceBioinformaticsMedicineBusinessEcologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MycoKey, an EU-funded Horizon 2020 project, includes a series of "Roundtable Discussions" to gather information on trending research areas in the field of mycotoxicology. This paper includes summaries of the Roundtable Discussions on Chemical Detection and Monitoring of mycotoxins and on the role of genetics and biodiversity in mycotoxin production. Discussions were managed by using the nominal group discussion technique, which generates numerous ideas and provides a ranking for those identified as the most important. Four questions were posed for each research area, as well as two questions that were common to both discussions. Test kits, usually antibody based, were one major focus of the discussions at the Chemical Detection and Monitoring roundtable because of their many favorable features, e.g., cost, speed and ease of use. The second area of focus for this roundtable was multi-mycotoxin detection protocols and the challenges still to be met to enable these protocols to become methods of choice for regulated mycotoxins. For the genetic and biodiversity group, both the depth and the breadth of trending research areas were notable. For some areas, e.g., microbiome studies, the suggested research questions were primarily of a descriptive nature. In other areas, multiple experimental approaches, e.g., transcriptomics, proteomics, RNAi and gene deletions, are needed to understand the regulation of toxin production and mechanisms underlying successful biological controls. Answers to the research questions will provide starting points for developing acceptable prevention and remediation processes. Forging a partnership between scientists and appropriately-placed communications experts was recognized by both groups as an essential step to communicating risks, while retaining overall confidence in the safety of the food supply and the integrity of the food production chain.

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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0130.014
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0130.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.017

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxinsSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207