MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2892203922 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0203445

Identifying genetic diversity of O antigens in Aeromonas hydrophila for molecular serotype detection

2018· article· en· W2892203922 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hengchun Cao, Min Wang, Qian Wang, Tingting Xu, Yuhui Du, Huiying Li, Chengqian Qian, Zhiqiu Yin, Lu Wang, Wei Yi, Pan Wu, Xi Guo, Bin Yang, Bin Liu

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAquaculture disease management and microbiota
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesTrinity Western UniversityMinistry of Education, IndiaYellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChinese Academy of Fishery SciencesNatural Science Foundation of Tianjin City
KeywordsAeromonas hydrophilaBiologyIn silicoVirulenceSerotypeGenomeGeneticsGeneMicrobiologyComputational biologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aeromonas hydrophila is a globally occurring, potentially virulent, gram-negative opportunistic pathogen that is known to cause water and food-borne diseases around the world. In this study, we use whole genome sequencing and in silico analyses to identify 14 putative O antigen gene clusters (OGCs) located downstream of the housekeeping genes acrB and/or oprM. We have also identified 7 novel OGCs by analyzing 15 publicly available genomes of different A. hydrophila strains. From the 14 OGCs identified initially, we have deduced that O antigen processing genes involved in the wzx/wzy pathway and the ABC transporter (wzm/wzt) pathway exhibit high molecular diversity among different A. hydrophila strains. Using these genes, we have developed a multiplexed Luminex-based array system that can identify up to 14 A. hydrophila strains. By combining our other results and including the sequences of processing genes from 13 other OGCs (7 OGCs identified from publicly available genome sequences and 6 OGCs that were previously published), we also have the data to create an array system that can identify 25 different A. hydrophila serotypes. Although clinical detection, epidemiological surveillance, and tracing of pathogenic bacteria are typically done using serotyping methods that rely on identifying bacterial surface O antigens through agglutination reactions with antisera, molecular methods such as the one we have developed may be quicker and more cost effective. Our assay shows high specificity, reproducibility, and sensitivity, being able to classify A. hydrophila strains using just 0.1 ng of genomic DNA. In conclusion, our findings indicate that a molecular serotyping system for A. hydrophila could be developed based on specific genes, providing an important molecular tool for the identification of A. hydrophila serotypes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicAquaculture disease management and microbiota→French-language works237,207→