Targeted metagenomics using bait-capture to detect antibiotic resistance genes in retail meat and seafood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metagenomics analysis of foods has the potential to provide comprehensive data on the presence and prevalence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes in the microbiome of foods. However, AMR genes are generally present in low abundance compared to other bacterial genes in the food microbiome and consequently require multiple rounds of in-depth sequencing for detection. Here, a metagenomics approach, using bait-capture probes targeting antimicrobial resistance and plasmid genes, is used to characterize the resistome and plasmidome of retail beef, chicken, oyster, shrimp, and veal enrichment cultures (n = 15). Compared to total shotgun metagenomics, bait-capture required approximately 40-fold fewer sequence reads to detect twice the number of AMR gene classes, AMR gene families, and plasmid genes across all sample types. For the detection of critically important extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) genes the bait capture method had a higher overall positivity rate (44%) compared to shotgun metagenomics (26%), and a culture-based method (29%). Overall, the results support the use of bait-capture for the identification of low abundance genes such as AMR genes from food samples.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".