Antimicrobial resistance of <i>Salmonella</i> and generic <i>Escherichia coli</i> isolated from surface water samples used for recreation and a source of drinking water in southwestern Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in the aquatic environment represents an important means of introduction and dissemination of resistance genes, and presence of resistant pathogens in surface waters may pose a public health concern to recreational and drinking water users. The purpose of this study was to explore antimicrobial resistance patterns in water samples collected from the Grand River watershed (southwestern Ontario, Canada) to describe the composition, trends and potential risks of AMR in the aquatic environment. As part of FoodNet Canada and the Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (CIPARS), stream water samples were collected bi-weekly from sampling sites within the Grand River watershed in the Waterloo, Ontario sentinel site and tested for the presence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Salmonella spp. (2005-2013) and generic Escherichia coli (2012-2013). Of all samples tested, 16% of Salmonella and 22% of E. coli isolates were resistant to at least one antimicrobial, including three Salmonella isolates and two E. coli isolates that were resistant to Category I antimicrobials, which are classified as very high importance for the treatment of serious bacterial infections in humans. The greatest proportion of resistant E. coli isolates were observed from the river site upstream of the drinking water intake, while the greatest proportion of resistant Salmonella isolates were from sites upstream in the watershed, and at one recreational water site. Salmonella resistance trends remained fairly stable between 2007 and 2013, with the exception of streptomycin and tetracycline which increased in 2010 and 2013. Continued surveillance of antimicrobial resistance patterns and exploration of risk factor data will allow for a better understanding of resistance transmission in the aquatic environment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".