IDBac: an open-access web platform to identify bacteria and analyze relationships in culture collections using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The identification and analysis of bacteria is central to the microbiological sciences. While gene sequencing methods have been the standard to achieve this, use of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry (MS), particularly in clinical microbiology, provides high-throughput identification to the subspecies level. However, biotyping has yet to be adopted outside of clinical settings due to the lack of a centralized public database of MS protein signatures that would facilitate isolate identification via spectral comparison. Further, current platforms lack meaningful ways to compare multiple properties from large numbers of bacterial isolates. Herein we present the IDBac web platform, a crowd-sourced central knowledgebase of protein MS signatures of >1400 strains spanning 6 bacterial phyla. Accompanying the knowledgebase is analysis infrastructure to identify unknown isolates, probe relationships within culture collections using metadata integration, and visualize specialized metabolite differences within groups of closely related bacteria. To highlight this utility and encourage wide community contribution, examples of each are presented.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.021 |
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".