MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Peer Review #1 of "Comparative analysis of the metabolically active microbial communities in the rumen of dromedary camels under different feeding systems using total rRNA sequencing (v0.6)"

2020· peer-review· en· W4246258169 on OpenAlexaff
Alaa Emara Rabee, Robert J. Forster, Chijioke Elekwachi, Ebrahim A. Sabra, Mebarek Lamara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Diversity and Health Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRumenBiologyRibosomal RNAFood scienceGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breakdown of plant biomass in rumen depends on interactions between bacteria, archaea, fungi, and protozoa; however, the majority of studies of the microbiome of ruminants, including the few studies of the rumen of camels, only studied one of these microbial groups. In this study, we applied total rRNA sequencing to identify active microbial communities in twenty-two solid and liquid rumen samples from eleven camels. These camels were reared at three stations that use different feeding systems: clover, hay and wheat straw (G1), fresh clover (G2), and wheat straw (G3). Bacteria dominated the libraries of sequence reads generated from all rumen samples, followed by protozoa, archaea, and fungi respectively. Firmicutes, Thermoplasmatales, Diplodinium, and Neocallimastix dominated bacterial, archaeal, protozoal and fungal communities, respectively in all samples. Libraries generated from camels reared at facility G2, where they were fed fresh clover, showed the highest alpha diversity. Principal co-ordinate analysis and linear discriminate analysis showed clusters associated with facility/feed and the relative abundance of microbes varied between liquid and solid fractions. This provides preliminary evidence that bacteria dominate the microbial communities of the camel rumen and these communities varies between populations of domesticated camels.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablemedium
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablemedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.117 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther · Commentary

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Diversity and Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207