Biofilm Formation, gel and esp Gene Carriage among Recreational Beach Enterococci
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biofilm production, gel and esp gene carriage was enumerated among forty six vancomycin resistant enterococci (VRE) and vancomycin susceptible enterococci (VSE) beach isolates. A higher proportion (61.54%) of biofilm producers was observed among beach sand as compared to beach water enterococci isolates (30%) indicating that enterococci within the sand column may be more dependent on biofilm production for survival than their beach water counterparts. Correlation analysis revealed strongly negative correlation (r=-0.535, p=0.015) between vancomycin resistance and biofilm formation. Given the observation of high prevalence of biofilm production among beach sand and the concomitant absence of esp gene carriage in any of the isolate, esp gene carriage may not be necessary for the production of biofilms among beach sand isolates. On the whole beach sand and water isolates demonstrated clearly different prevalence levels of vancomycin resistance, biofilm formation, esp and gel gene carriage. Application of these differences may be found useful in beach microbial source tracking studies. Tested starved cells still produced biofilm albeit at lower efficiencies. Non-dividing enterococci in beach sand can survive extended periods of environmental hardship and can resume growth or biofilm production in appropriate conditions thus making them infectious agents with potential health risk to recreational beach users.
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 | 0.001 | 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".