MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408851237 · doi:10.3168/jds.2024-26109

Invited review: Mastitis Escherichia coli strains—Mastitis-associated or mammo-pathogenic?

2025· review· en· W4408851237 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Germon, Gilles Foucras, David G. Smith, Pascal Rainard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Microbiologists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMastitisMicrobiologyEscherichia coliPathogenic Escherichia coliBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bovine mastitis remains a major concern for dairy farmers, mainly because of its effect on the economy of their activity and on animal welfare. Because Escherichia coli is considered a major mastitis pathogen, the diversity of E. coli strains isolated from mastitis cases has been studied for decades, with the aim to discover new ways to fight this infection. With the recent advances in whole-genome sequencing, a detailed view of the peculiarities of mastitis E. coli strains has emerged. This review aims to bring together the knowledge garnered over the years with the more recent results of whole-genome analyses. Whereas the concept of a mammary pathogenic E. coli has been proposed, because a common set of virulence genes cannot be identified among mastitis E. coli strains, we prefer the use of mastitis-associated E. coli (MAEC), with MAEC being more an "ecotype" rather than a "pathotype." Indeed, data available so far suggest that a common feature of MAEC would rather be an enrichment in fitness capabilities that makes them well-suited for survival and rapid adaptation to changing biotopes in the mammary gland, which we qualify as intramammary ecotopes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsFrench-language works237,207