Recovery and viability of<i>Cryptosporidium parvum</i>oocysts and<i>Giardia intestinalis</i>cysts using the membrane dissolution procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously, the cellulose acetate membrane filter dissolution method was reported to yield Cryptosporidium parvum oocyst recoveries of 70.5%, with recovered oocysts retaining their infectivity. In contrast, high spike doses (approximately 1 × 105Cryptosporidium parvum oocysts and Giardia intestinalis cysts) yielded recoveries ranging from 0.4% to 83.9%, and 3.2% to 90.3%, respectively, in this study. Recoveries with low spike doses (approximately 100 (oo)cysts) continued to demonstrate high variability also. Efforts to optimize the method included increased centrifugation speeds, suspension of the final concentrate in deionized water for organism detection on well slides, and analysis of the entire concentrate. A comparison of two monoclonal antibodies was also conducted to identify potential differences between antibodies in detection of organisms. Archived source and finished water samples were spiked, yielding variable recoveries of C. parvum oocysts (11.8% to 71.4%) and G. intestinalis cysts (7.4% to 42.3%). Effects of organic solvents used in the membrane dissolution procedure on the viability of recovered (oo)cysts was determined using a fluorogenic vital dyes assay in conjunction with (oo)cyst morphology, which indicated >99% inactivation. These data indicate that the membrane dissolution procedure yields poor and highly variable (oo)cyst recoveries, and also renders the majority of recovered organisms non-viable.Key words: Giardia, Cryptosporidium, membrane dissolution, viability.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".