MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Culturing Human Gut Microbiomes in the Laboratory

2021· review· en· W3164017968 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Microbiology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersBreakthrough T1D CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsCancer Research UK
KeywordsAxenicMicrobiomeBiologyIsolation (microbiology)MetagenomicsGut floraGut microbiomeHuman healthHuman microbiomeHost (biology)MicrobiologyComputational biologyEcologyBacteriaBioinformaticsImmunologyGeneticsGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human gut microbiota is a complex community of prokaryotic and eukaryotic microbes and viral particles that is increasingly associated with many aspects of host physiology and health. However, the classical microbiology approach of axenic culture cannot provide a complete picture of the complex interactions between microbes and their hosts in vivo. As such, recently there has been much interest in the culture of gut microbial ecosystems in the laboratory as a strategy to better understand their compositions and functions. In this review, we discuss the model platforms and methods available in the contemporary microbiology laboratory to study human gut microbiomes, as well as current knowledge surrounding the isolation of human gut microbes for the potential construction of defined communities for use in model systems.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.346 · 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