Antimicrobial Sensitivity Testing of Mycoplasma bovis Isolates Derived from Western Canadian Feedlot Cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mycoplasma bovis is particularly adept at evading the immune system, resulting in chronic infections of the lungs and joints of feedlot cattle. The chronicity of the lesions results in prolonged antimicrobial therapy, possibly exacerbating antimicrobial resistance. This cross-sectional study generated in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) data on 211 M. bovis isolates recovered from 159 healthy, diseased, and dead cattle, spanning the period of 2006–2018. Nine antimicrobials commonly administered to western Canadian feedlot cattle were assessed. The data were analyzed with non-parametric statistical tests with a level of significance of p < 0.05 (two-tailed). Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values tended to increase between the isolates from healthy versus dead cattle and over time (2006–2018). Isolates from dead versus healthy cattle were more likely to be resistant to tulathromycin, gamithromycin, tylosin and enrofloxacin. There was no difference in the distributions of the MICs generated from the isolates recovered from the lungs and joints (p ≥ 0.124) and the lungs and deep nasal passages (p ≥ 0.157) of the same animals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".