Tannin derived materials can block swarming motility and enhance biofilm formation in<i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surface-associated swarming motility is implicated in enhanced bacterial spreading and virulence, hence it follows that anti-swarming effectors could have clinical benefits. When investigating potential applications of anti-swarming materials it is important to consider whether the lack of swarming corresponds with an enhanced sessile biofilm lifestyle and resistance to antibiotics. In this study, well-defined tannins present in multiple plant materials (tannic acid (TA) and epigallocathecin gallate (EGCG)) and undefined cranberry powder (CP) were found to block swarming motility and enhance biofilm formation and resistance to tobramycin in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In contrast, gallic acid (GA) did not completely block swarming motility and did not affect biofilm formation or tobramycin resistance. These data support the theory that nutritional conditions can elicit an inverse relationship between swarming motility and biofilm formation capacities. Although anti-swarmers exhibit the potential to yield clinical benefits, it is important to be aware of possible implications regarding biofilm formation and antibiotic resistance.
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".