MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411152881 · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2025.05.006

Using the microbiota to study connectivity at human–animal interfaces

2025· review· en· W4411152881 on OpenAlexaff
Dishon Muloi, Alexandre Caron, James A. Berkley, James M. Hassell, Ilana Brito, Kayla C. King, Arshnee Moodley, Eric M. Fèvre

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Microbiology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research Centers
KeywordsBiologyComputational biologyEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interfaces between humans, livestock, and wildlife, mediated by the environment, are critical points for the transmission and emergence of infectious pathogens and call for leveraging the One Health approach to understanding disease transmission. Current research on pathogen transmission often focuses on single-pathogen systems, providing a limited understanding of the broader microbial interactions occurring at these interfaces. In this review, we make a case for the study of host-associated microbiota for understanding connectivity between host populations at human-animal interfaces. First, we emphasize the need to understand changes in microbiota composition dynamics from interspecies contact. Then, we explore the potential for microbiota monitoring at such interfaces as a predictive tool for infectious disease transmission and as an early-warning system to inform public health interventions. We discuss the methodological challenges and gaps in knowledge in analyzing microbiota composition dynamics, the functional meaning of these changes, and how to establish causality between microbiota changes and health outcomes. We posit that integrating microbiota science with social-ecological systems modeling is essential for advancing our ability to manage health risks and harness opportunities arising from interspecies interactions.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in MicrobiologySame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207