Comparison of a Miniaturized Cassette PCR System with a Commercially Available Platform for Detecting Escherichia coli in Beef Carcass Swabs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detection sensitivity of cassette PCR was compared with a commercial BAX® PCR system for detection of eae and stx genes in Escherichia coli from 806 beef carcass swabs. Cassette PCR detects multiple genetic markers on multiple samples using PCR and melt curve analysis. Conventional PCR served as a gold standard. Overall, for positive and negative concordance, cassette PCR was 98.6% concordant with conventional PCR, and BAX PCR was 65.4% concordant. Of 806 beef carcass swabs, 339 by cassette PCR and 84 by BAX PCR harbored eae + stx+E. coli. For BAX PCR reactions, 84% of eae+ swabs, 79% of stx+ swabs, and 86% of eae + stx+ swabs were also detected by cassette PCR. For cassette PCR reactions, 457 swabs were eae+ with only 117 scored as eae+ using BAX PCR for 26% positive concordance. For stx primers, cassette PCR scored 480 samples as stx+ but only 215 samples were stx+ by BAX PCR, giving 45% positive concordance. Importantly, cassette PCR scored 339 swabs as harboring eae + stx+ E. coli, but BAX PCR detected only 71 positives giving only 21% positive concordance, with many false negatives. Cassette PCR is a highly sensitive method for detection of STEC genes in E. coli found in carcass swabs.
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) | 0.001 | 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".