MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

To Be or Not to Be Mesophilic, That Is the Question for Aeromonas salmonicida

2022· article· en· W4214767615 on OpenAlex
Antony T. Vincent, Steve J. Charette

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroorganisms · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAquaculture disease management and microbiota
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychrophileAeromonas salmonicidaMesophileBiologyEcological nicheAeromonasBacteriaEcologyMicrobiologyFish <Actinopterygii>ZoologyFisheryGeneticsHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bacterium Aeromonas salmonicida has long been known to be one of the most feared pathogens in fish farming. However, the more we discover about this bacterial species, the more we question whether it is really exclusively an aquatic pathogen. In recent years, it has become obvious that this bacterial species includes a myriad of strains with various lifestyle and ecological niches, including the well-known strict psychrophiles, the first bacteria known of the species, and the newly described mesophilic strains. The mesophiles are able to grow at low temperatures, but even better at temperatures of approximately 37 °C, which strict psychrophiles cannot do. In this perspective article, we address some aspects surrounding this dual lifestyle in A. salmonicida, including the impact of mobile genetic elements, and how future research around this bacterial species may focus on the psychrophilic/mesophilic dichotomy, which makes A. salmonicida an increasingly interesting and relevant model for the study of speciation.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.251 · 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