MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416575320 · doi:10.3390/toxins17120565

Bacterial Microbiota in Soil Amended with Deoxynivalenol-Contaminated Wheat

2025· article· en· W4416575320 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emmanuel W. Bumunang, Kim Stanford, Yuxi Wang, Benjamin H. Ellert, Matthew Waldner, Trevor W. Alexander

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacteriaSoil waterSoil microbiology16S ribosomal RNAMicroorganismContaminationSoil testMycotoxin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feed contaminated with the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol (DON) can negatively impact livestock health and performance. Bacteria capable of degrading DON present a method of mitigating its harmful effects. This study aimed to identify microbial consortia from soil samples that could degrade DON. Soil from central (Lacombe, LA) and southern (Lethbridge, LE) Alberta were used as microbial inoculant. The soils were mixed with DON-contaminated wheat (18 ppm/kg) on day 0, and each soil type was divided into triplicate pots (180 g) and placed in a controlled environment for 32 d. Control pots of each soil type were included, which contained no DON-contaminated wheat. On days 0, 7, 14, and 32, 1 g subsamples were collected from pots, serially diluted in a limited medium containing DON (10 µg/mL) as the only carbon source, and incubated for 2 weeks (30 °C). DNA was extracted from the pots across time, as well as the subsample consortia grown in DON-amended medium, and was analyzed for bacterial changes after 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The relative abundance of bacterial genera in soil samples after enrichment with DON-contaminated wheat increased across time compared to the baseline day 0 time point. DON-degrading activity (26%) was only detected in LA soil suspension on day 7, and was highest after 14 days of incubation. The most abundant bacteria in the LA DON-degrading consortia belonged to the Pseudomonas (8.8%), Delftia (7.4%), Acinetobacter (6.4%), Comamonas (5.7%), Stenotrophomonas (5.5%), Shinella (5.5%), Ensifer (5.1%), Agrobacterium (5.0%), Achromobacter (4.7%), and Rhizobium (3.7%) genera. Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 9) and Serratia liquefaciens (n = 3) strains isolated from the LA consortia did not degrade DON. Overall, this study shows that the soil contained bacteria capable of degrading DON; however, variation existed depending on the soil’s source.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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.

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 venueToxinsSame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207