MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2996281523 · doi:10.1139/cjm-2019-0282

<i>Acinetobacter baumannii</i> detected on modified charcoal–cefoperazone–deoxycholate agar in a waste stabilization pond

2019· article· en· W2996281523 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maxim Sheludchenko, Anna Padovan, Mohammad Katouli, Helen Stratton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcinetobacter baumanniiCefoperazoneMicrobiologyCampylobacterAgarBiologyActivated charcoalBacteriaCampylobacter jejuniFood scienceChemistryAntibioticsAntibiotic resistanceImipenem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Campylobacter is a recommended reference pathogen for the verification and validation of water recycling schemes in Australia and globally. In a larger study investigating the efficacy of pathogen removal in waste stabilization ponds (WSP), we cultivated bacteria from wastewater samples on modified charcoal–cefoperazone–deoxycholate agar (mCCDA) targeting the growth of Campylobacter. A high number of colonies characteristic of Campylobacter grew on this selective medium, but this did not correlate with qPCR data. Using primers targeting the 16S rRNA gene, and additional confirmatory tests to detect VS1, ompA, blaOXA-51-like, blaOXA-23-like genes, we tested 80 random colonies from 10 WSP samples. All 80 were identified as Acinetobacter baumannii. Wastewater grab samples taken three times over 6 months throughout the WSP system showed removal of A. baumannii in the WSP at rates similar to that of Escherichia coli. Our study suggests that mCCDA agar is not a suitable medium for isolating Campylobacter from environmental samples and that A. baumannii can be used as an indicator for removal of pathogens in WSPs.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Microbiology→Same topicSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology→French-language works237,207→