Experimental Investigation on the Effects of Audible Sound to the Growth of Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we report an experimental result regarding the effects of audible sound on the growth of Escherichia coli (E. coli). Standardized E. coli suspensions of fixed concentration were used for inoculation throughout the experiment in nutrient agar (NA) and nutrient broth (NB). First, the samples were incubated at 37ºC for three hours in a water bath-shaker for NB and in a conventional oven for NA. The samples were then transferred to an acoustic chamber JedMark LV-1 with given sound treatment at controlled temperature of 24±2ºC for five hours for NB and 16 hours for NA. Three different tonal frequencies were selected for sound treatment in this experiment which is 1 kHz, 5 kHz and 15 kHz. The growth of E. coli was assessed by their cell number through indirect viable cell counts (E. coli on NA) and direct viable cell counts (E. coli on NB), after the incubation with sound in the acoustic chamber. We found that all selected frequencies were able to promote the growth of E. coli. In particular, the tonal sound of 5 kHz gave significant increase in cell number of E. coli for both growth media.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".