Estimation of Performance Characteristics of Analytical Methods for Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis Detection in Dairy Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(MAP), affecting virtually all ruminants as well as other animals. MAP is also suspected to be involved in the etiology of some human diseases, like Crohn's disease and others. In surveillance studies, different analytical methodologies were employed to detect MAP, showing different results and incidence in dairy products. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance characteristics of three analytical methods [culture, quantitative PCR (qPCR) and peptide-mediated magnetic separation (PMS) phage-based assay] for MAP detection in raw, heat-treated and powdered milk. The methods were evaluated according to performance characteristics defined for qualitative methods in ISO 16140-2:2016. To estimate sensitivity (including trueness) and LOD, 720, and 900 test portions, respectively, were blind tested by two laboratories. Considering all matrices, different sensitivities, expressed as the percentage of positives from the total of true positive test portions, were obtained for IS900 qPCR (94%), f57 qPCR (76%), culture (83%), and PMS-phage (40%). Trueness, expressed as results correctly assigned (including positive and negative) to the reference value, was 93% for the IS900 qPCR method, 89% for culture and 49% for the PMS-phage. The LODs obtained in this study were similar to the LODs previously published for cultural and qPCR methods. However, for the PMS-phage method, the obtained results showed higher LOD values compared to the limited data available in the scientific literature. Our results highlight that while the PMS-phage assay is workable in pure liquid culture for estimation of MAP counts, its usage for surveillance of dairy matrices should be treated with a lot of caution as performance characteristics obtained were lower than for the two other methods tested. qPCR and culture are the most appropriate methods to detect MAP in milk-based matrices according to ISO 16140 methodology. Cultural techniques are considered the gold standard for detection of viable MAP, but qPCR, which is widely used in analytical and surveillance studies, can be considered a suitable and recommendable alternative to cultural methods for screening, if confirmation of MAP's viability is not requested.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".