Elimination of Antibiotic-Resistant Plasmids by Quinolone Antibiotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of 7 plasmids we tested, the plasmid pORF2 was eliminated in vitro with the most efficiency by treatment with subinhibitory concentrations of novobiocin, coumermycin and 10 quinolones. It showed a cure rate of 43% by enoxacin; 12% by novobiocin, pefloxacin, ciprofloxacin and CI-934; 7% by coumermycin and ofloxacin; 9% by amifloxacin; and 4% by AM-833. On the other hand, pSC194, pBR322 and pMH612 were poorly cured in vitro by quinolones, except pSC194 which was cured 33% by enoxacin. R1, pP1603, and pUB110 were unaffected by the treatment. Mice were challenged intraperitoneally with a 2XLD50 of Escherichia coli carrying the ORF2 plasmid and were treated per os with 1 X or 1/2 X ED50 of either enoxacin or CI-934. The frequency of loss of ampicillin resistance determined 3 h after treatment shows curing effects of 92% for CI-934, 89% for enoxacin and 20% for untreated control.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".