MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414771358 · doi:10.1101/2025.10.02.679970

Fluorescence <i>in situ</i> hybridization (FISH) and detection of Bacteria and Archaea cells in fecal samples

2025· preprint· en· W4414771358 on OpenAlexafffund
Maria Nejjari, Michel Cloutier, Guylaine Talbot, Martin Lanthier

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Soil, Plant Science
Canadian institutionsAgri-Neo (Canada)Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsBacteriaFluorescence microscopeFluorescence in situ hybridizationArchaeaRibosomal RNA16S ribosomal RNAFluorescenceConfocalMicroorganismConfocal laser scanning microscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Oligonucleotide probes have been used to detect bacteria and archaea that colonize the cattle and pig digestive system. The Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) is a molecular biology technique that uses oligonucleotides of 15 to 25 nucleotides of length associated with a fluorescent molecule. In microbiology, the FISH technique utilizes probes targeting ribosomal RNA (rRNA). It is one amongst others, a staining technique that allows the identification, detection and quantification of microorganisms without prior cultivation by means of epifluorescence and confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). In this study, we describe the usage of the confocal laser scanning microscopy coupled with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), in order to detect and quantify of bacteria and archaea in fecal samples from cattles’ manure and swine slurry.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicAgriculture, Soil, Plant ScienceFrench-language works237,207