MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047643137 · doi:10.3390/agriculture10080341

Microbial and Parasitic Contamination of Fresh Raw Vegetable Samples and Detection of the BlaTEM and BlaCTX-M Genes from E. coli Isolates

2020· article· en· W3047643137 on OpenAlexaff
Alina Ghimire, J. S. Upadhyaya, Tulsi Nayaju, Binod Lekhak, Dhiraj Kumar Chaudhary, Vijaya Raghavan, Bhoj Raj Pant, Tirtha Raj Bajgai, Niranjan Koirala, Milan Kumar Upreti

Bibliographic record

VenueAgriculture · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEscherichia coliTetracyclineMicrobiologyPolymerase chain reactionContaminationGeneAntibioticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A total of 100 fresh-raw vegetable samples were collected from the Kathmandu, Lalitpur and Bhaktapur districts of Nepal to evaluate microbial and parasitic contamination, presence of Extended Spectrum Beta Lactamase (ESBL)-producing Escherichia coli and detect the blaTEM and blaCTX-M genes among the Escherichia coli isolates. This study revealed that the prevalence of Giardia cysts was highest (100%) and Hookworm and Entamoeba coli were lowest (1% each). Coliforms were isolated from every raw vegetable sample. A total of 178 bacterial isolates were isolated among which 57 isolates were identified as E. coli, out of which 33 were Multi-drug resistant (MDR) isolates. The high rate of resistance was found towards amoxicillin/clavulanate, tetracycline and cotrimoxazole. The 10 E. coli isolates tested positive in an ESBL screening, out of which 4 were confirmed as ESBL producers by a combined disc test. Out of these 4 confirmed ESBL E. coli, one was found to carry both the blaTEM gene and blaCTX-M genes by the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technique. One isolate has only the blaTEM gene, while other isolate harboured only blaCTX-M genes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultureSame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207