Evaluation of the photocatalytic antimicrobial effects of a TiO2 nanocomposite food packaging film by in vitro and in vivo tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to inactivate Pseudomonas spp. and Rhodotorula mucilaginosa by a photocatalyst thin film, obtained via a combination of anatase and rutile titanium dioxide incorporation into a low density polyethylene (LDPE) polymeric matrix by a melt blending method, was addressed in this study. The number of surviving cell of the Pseudomonas spp. was decreased by 4 log CFU/ml and 1.35 log CFU/ml after 3 h of UVA illumination on TiO2 nanocomposite thin film and LDPE thin film, respectively. The number of cells of R. mucilaginosa decreased by 2 log CFU/ml and 0.64 log CFU/ml on TiO2 nanocomposite thin film and LDPE thin film, respectively. In an in vivo test carried out on fresh pears packaged in TiO2 nanocomposite film and stored under illumination by a fluorescent light lamp at 5 °C for 17 days, the number of mesophilic bacteria and yeast cells decreased significantly compared to samples stored in LDPE film. The greatest effects were recorded by combining UVA illumination and active film. It was also proven that the photocatalyst thin film prepared by extrusion could be effectively used in fruit packaging applications.
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) | 0.001 | 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".