Inactivation of <i>Lactobacillus rhamnosus</i> GG by fixation modifies its probiotic properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probiotics are microorganisms that have beneficial effects on the host and are safe for oral intake in a suitable dose. However, there are situations in which the administration of living microorganisms poses a risk for immunocompromised host. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of several fixation methods on selected biological properties of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG that are relevant to its probiotic action. Fixation of the bacterial cells with ethanol, 2-propanol, glutaraldehyde, paraformaldehyde, and heat treatment resulted in a significant decrease of alkaline phosphatase, peroxidase, and β-galactosidase activities. Most of the fixation procedures reduced bacterial cell hydrophobicity and increased adhesion capacity. The fixation procedures resulted in a different perception of the bacterial cells by enterocytes, which was shown as changes in gene expression in enterocytes. The results show that some procedures of inactivation allow a fraction of the enzymatic activity to be maintained. The adhesion properties of the bacterial cells were enhanced, but the response of enterocytes to fixed cells was different than to live bacteria. Inactivation allows maintenance and modification of some of the properties of the bacterial cells.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".