MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7054756128

Antimicrobial resistance in the microbiome of feedlot watering bowls and bovine respiratory disease associated pathogens.

2023· dissertation· en· W7054756128 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGénome QuébecMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsFeedlotBovine respiratory diseaseMicrobiomeAntibiotic resistanceAntimicrobialFlorfenicolBeef cattleContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is the primary disease of concern to beef production and is driven by stress, bacteria, viruses, and environmental and management practices. Antimicrobial use (AMU) to control BRD selects for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes (ARGs). Treatment failure due to AMR necessitates a rapid switch to an effective antimicrobial before a devastating amount of death loss occurs. Monitoring AMR in a herd through individual animals is impractical. There is a need for a fast, pragmatic, and scalable methodology to monitor AMR within cattle to guide effective AMU. Cattle watering bowls (WB) have been previously shown to harbour BRD pathogens and ARGs but have yet to be explored in the same context as wastewater AMR monitoring is for public health. This thesis outlines a pilot project of WB sampling as a proxy method to monitor the presence of ARGs of relevance to BRD associated pathogens. The microbiomes within watering bowls of two feedlots were genotypically and phenotypically assessed through water, swab, and sediment sampling. A new feedlot was sampled (68 water, 63 swab) as pens filled (up to 9 WB) over a series of 8 weeks. The other, older, feedlot was only sampled in the 8th week (sediment, swab, water) from 20 WB. For phenotypic AMR detection, samples were inoculated into antimicrobial sensitivity test (AST) panels containing microdilutions of four antimicrobials (enrofloxacin, florfenicol (FFN), tulathromycin, oxytetracycline). Bacteria that grew on these plates were isolated (n = 78). A subset (n = 28 new feedlot, n = 3 old feedlot + H. somni from a deep nasopharyngeal swab) of these underwent further characterisation on an AST panel containing 10 different antimicrobials. The whole genome of isolates (n = 10, 6 new, 4 old) was sequenced and analysed for ARGs. These detected ARGs were compared to a custom dataset of 172 BRD genomes from NCBI. The genetic neighbourhood of floR, an ARG encoding for the efflux of FFN, within the WB isolates (n = 4) was also compared to pathogen genomes. For the culture-independent methodology, samples from one feedlot underwent amplified 16S rRNA sequencing (n = 122), while samples from the other underwent shotgun metagenomic sequencing (n = 11). The ARGs detected in WB isolates were compared to the ARGs detected within metagenomic sequencing, and previous datasets of feedlot water. Multi-drug resistant bacteria were routinely isolated from WBs. When environmental samples from the last week of sampling were inoculated into media with FFN (>32 µg/mL), 93/96 samples had bacterial growth. By constructing a genotypic AMR profile from two feedlots and by consulting previous metagenomic datasets from feedlot water, the understudied resistome of the watering bowl microbiome was shown to provide outstanding coverage of the ARGs (15/16) detected within 172 BRD genomes. The overlap in genetic neighbourhoods between copies of floR in WB and BRD genomes confirms the possibility of horizontal gene transfer via a myriad of transposable elements between both populations. Though further studies are needed to reaffirm our findings, in this thesis the understudied environmental microbiome within feedlot watering bowls was found to serve as a potential source of ARGs for BRD pathogens and thus may serve as a proxy for relevant ARGs within feedlot environments.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)→Same topicLaser Design and Applications→French-language works237,207→