Antimicrobial activity of methanol extracts of Abietinella abietina, Neckera crispa, Platyhypnidium riparoides, Cratoneuron filicinum and Campylium protensum mosses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The antibacterial and antifungal activity of methanol extracts of the genuine mosses Abietinella abietina, Neckera crispa, Platyhypnidium riparoides, Cratoneuron filicinum var. filicinum and Campylium protensum were evaluated. Antibacterial activity was tested against Gram (+) Staphylococcus aureus, Micrococcus flavus, Bacillus cereus and Gram (-) bacteria Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium. Antifungal activity was tested using micromycetes Trichoderma viride, Penicillium funiculosum, Penicillium ochrochloron, Aspergillus flavus, A. niger and A. fumigatus. The methanol extracts of all moss species showed an antimicrobial effect against the tested microorganisms. Significant antibacterial effect was achieved for Cratoneuron filicinum and Neckera crispa. The most sensitive bacteria were Bacillus subtilis and Micrococcus flavus. Abietinella abietina and Neckera crispa showed an antifungal effect against micromycetes Trichoderma viride, Penicillium ochrachloron, P. funiculosum and Aspergillus flavus.
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".