Comparison of ATP and in vivo bioluminescence for assessing the efficiency of immunomagnetic sorbents for live Escherichia coli O157:H7 cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To develop methods to assess the efficiency of immunomagnetic separation (IMS). METHODS AND RESULTS: The capturing efficiency of biosorbents for Escherichia coli O157:H7, constructed using streptavidin-coated magnetic beads and biotinylated antibodies, was tested using both in vivo and ATP bioluminescence. Both methods were suitable for the enumeration of bacteria captured by the biosorbents. The level of both ATP and in vivo bioluminescence depended on the media used, but was unaffected by the magnetic beads. The capture efficiency depended on time and sample volume, but did not depend on the length of spacer arm of the biotinylation agent. For cell concentrations of <or= 105 cfu ml-1, in a 1-ml sample volume, nearly 80-85% recovery of the pathogen was observed after 0.5 h of incubation. For an 11-ml sample containing 104 cfu ml-1, maximum recovery (50% of cells) was achieved only after 2 h incubation. CONCLUSIONS: The detection limit of an ATP-based bioluminescent assay for E. coli O157:H7 was reduced by 1 log cycle after optimization of IMS. The bioluminescent methods could be used for screening and testing the affinity of antibodies or other affinity elements of biosorbents towards live bacterial cells. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Bioluminescent assays provide an easy way to optimize conditions for the capture of bacteria by biosorbents in real time.
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".