Occurrence and growth characteristics of<i>Escherichia coli</i>and enterococci within the accumulated fluid of the northern pitcher plant (<i>Sarracenia purpurea</i>L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sarracenia purpurea L., a carnivorous bog plant (also known as the pitcher plant), represents an excellent model of a well-defined, self-contained ecosystem; the individual pitchers of the plant serve as a microhabitat for a variety of micro- and macro-organisms. Previously, fecal indicator bacteria (Escherichia coli and enterococci) were shown as incidental contaminants in pitcher fluid; however, whether their occurrence in pitcher fluid is incidental or common has not been established. The purpose of this study was to investigate the occurrence, distribution, and growth potential of E. coli and enterococci in pitcher plant fluid from a protected bog in northwest Indiana. Escherichia coli and enterococci were recovered in pitcher fluids (n=43 plants), with mean densities (log CFU mL-1) of 1.28+/-0.23 and 1.97+/-0.27, respectively. In vitro experiments showed that E. coli growth in fluid not containing insects or indigenous organisms was directly proportional to the fluid concentration (growth was 10-fold in 24 h in 100% fluid); however, in the presence of other indigenous organisms, E. coli and enterococci were only sustained for 5 days at 26 degrees C. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis showed that the plant Enterococcus faecalis isolates were genetically distinct from the human isolates; identical PFGE patterns were observed among plant isolates that fell into one of six clonal groups. These findings suggest that (i) E. coli and enterococci occurrence in pitcher plants is rather common in the bog studied, although their originating source is unclear, and (ii) the pitcher fluid contains adequate nutrients, especially carbon and energy sources, to promote the growth of indicator bacteria; however, under natural conditions, the biotic factors (e.g., competition for nutrients) may restrict their growth.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".