Inhibition of<i>Listeria monocytogenes</i>by a combination of chitosan and divergicin M35
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The antimicrobial activities of the class IIa bacteriocin divergicin M35 and several types of chitosan against Listeria monocytogenes were quantified by agar diffusion, critical micro-dilution, and viable count and observed by electron microscopy. Antimicrobial activity of chitosan depended on its molecular mass (MM) and the pH. Three chitosans with MM values of 2, 20, and 100 kDa and 87.4% degree of deacetylation (DDA) were chosen for further study, based on high anti-listerial activity at pH 4.5. Electron microscopy suggested that the mechanism of anti-listerial activity also varied with the MM. Low-MM chitosan appeared to inhibit L. monocytogenes by affecting cell permeability and growth, whereas medium- and high-MM chitosan may form a barrier on the cell surface that prevents entry of nutrients. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of 2, 20, and 100 kDa chitosan and divergicin M35 against a divergicin-resistant strain of L. monocytogenes (LSD 535) were 2.5, 2.5, 0.625, and 0.25 mg/mL, respectively. The combination of any of these 3 chitosans and divergicin M35 appeared to have an additive effect against L. monocytogenes, as determined by fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) index. This study provides useful data for the development of chitosan films incorporating divergicin M35 for inhibiting L. monocytogenes in foods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".