Establishing the Minimal Bactericidal Concentration of an Antimicrobial Agent for Planktonic Cells (MBC-P) and Biofilm Cells (MBC-B)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This protocol allows for a direct comparison between planktonic and biofilm resistance for a bacterial strain that can form a biofilm in vitro. Bacteria are inoculated into the wells of a 96-well microtiter plate. In the case of the planktonic assay, serial dilutions of the antimicrobial agent of choice are added to the bacterial suspensions. In the biofilm assay, once inoculated, the bacteria are left to form a biofilm over a set period of time. Unattached cells are removed from the wells, the media is replenished and serial dilutions of the antimicrobial agent of choice are added. After exposure to the antimicrobial agent, the planktonic cells are assayed for growth. For the biofilm assay, the media is refreshed with fresh media lacking the antimicrobial agent and the biofilm cells are left to recover. Biofilm cell viability is assayed after the recovery period. The MBC-P for the antimicrobial agent is defined as the lowest concentration of drug that kills the cells in the planktonic culture. In contrast, the MBC-B for a strain is determined by exposing preformed biofilms to increasing concentrations of antimicrobial agent for 24 hr. The MBC-B is defined as the lowest concentration of antimicrobial agent that kills the cells in the biofilm.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".