Genetic and phenotypic diversity of Bifidobacterium thermacidophilum fecal isolates from newborns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was undertaken to genetically identify and phenotypically characterize 14 bifidobacteria isolated from 20 breast-fed newborns. These isolates showed 98%-99% similarity to Bifidobacterium thermacidophilum subsp. suis based on 16S rDNA. Further analysis by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis of chromosomal DNA digested with XbaI revealed 4 distinct restriction patterns. The predominant pattern, shared by 8 (57%) isolates, produced a macro-restriction profile with about 13 large fragments ranging in size from >242.5 to 23.1 kb, whereas the other 6 displayed 3 distinct restriction profiles all characterized by more micro- than macro-restriction, with fragments ranging in size from 97 to 9.4 kb. Phenotypic characteristics, including carbohydrate fermentation profile, maximal growth temperature, and antibiotic susceptibility, varied widely even among strains showing the same restriction profile. The presence of B. thermacidophilum in stools of newborn infants may indicate the potential of these bacteria for aiding the development of the intestinal ecosystem.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".