MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107980770 · doi:10.1139/er-2020-0087

Antibiotic resistance genes in the aquaculture sector: global reports and research gaps

2020· article· en· W3107980770 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Justin O.G. Kemp, Jessica J. Taylor, Lisa A. Kelly, Renée Larocque, Armando Heriazon, Kevin H. D. Tiessen, Steven J. Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityInternational Development Research Centre
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsAquacultureAntibiotic resistanceBiotechnologyBiologyIdentification (biology)Investment (military)Systematic reviewBusinessGeographyEcologyAntibioticsFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Political scienceMEDLINEMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aquaculture has been one of the fastest-growing food production systems over the last decade and increased intensification of production has created conditions that favour disease outbreaks. Antibiotics are commonly applied in the food animal sector to fight against bacterial infections; however, their inappropriate use contributes to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Investment in research and capacity-strengthening, in parallel with enforcing existing regulations around antimicrobial use, are potentially powerful tools in tackling the threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) emanating from animal producing systems such as aquaculture. However, directing investment effectively is challenging due to the limited data available that hinder the identification of risk areas for current and future AMR emergence. Here, we aim to partially fill this gap by analyzing the current peer-reviewed literature reporting antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) in aquaculture food production systems and combining the data in a systematic map. Systematic searches of three bibliographic databases, a search engine, and 120 reviews returned 10 699 articles that were screened at title and abstract and then by full text (n = 1100). Two hundred and eighteen articles, spanning 39 countries and six continents, met all inclusion criteria and were coded to retrieve bibliographic, methodology, and study outcome data. ARG detections were associated with 44 families of fish and crustaceans and 75 genera of bacteria, with most studies employing primer-based methods to detect ARGs. A narrative synthesis explores implications for future research and policy as well as limitations of the systematic mapping methodology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsFrench-language works237,207