Antibiotic Resistance Testing and Enumeration of E. coli, Coliforms, and Salmonella in Canada Geese Feces Based on Natural Water Sources and Retention Ponds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) are migrating birds. They can transmit antibiotic resistant bacteria when they are traveling. They do this by ingesting antibiotic resistant bacteria that is on the food they eat in one area, and then excrete some of it at the next place they travel to. Retention ponds have increased amounts of antibiotic-resistant bacteria that Canada geese can pick up if they stop there while migrating. Canada geese that land at a retention pond should have an increased amount of antibiotic resistance compared to landing at a natural water source. Their feces were tested in eight different areas to determine the amount of bacteria and antibiotic resistance present. Any Escherichia coli and Salmonella that inhabit and grow in the feces were counted. The natural water sources did not grow Salmonella, but E. coli was found in everything. The E. coli was then tested with five different antibiotics to see if E. coli is resistant, intermediate, or susceptible based on where it was found. The data then determined that Canada geese are more prone to ingesting ampicillin antibiotic resistant E. coli when they land at a retention pond versus near a natural water 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".