Bacterial bioluminescence response to long-term exposure to reverse osmosis treated effluents from dye industries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bacterial bioluminescence assay is one of the novel means for toxicity detection. The bioluminescence response of 2 marine bioluminescent bacteria was tested upon their long-term exposure to 9 different reverse osmosis (RO) rejects with varying chemical composition sampled from various dye industries. Bioluminescent bacteria were cultured in the RO reject samples, at different concentrations, and their growth rate and luminescence was measured for 24 h. The RO reject samples caused sublethal effects upon exposure and retarded the growth of bacteria, confirming their toxic nature. Further, continuation of the exposure showed that the initial luminescence, though reduced, recovered and increased beyond the control cultures irrespective of cell density, and finally decreased once again. The present study emphasizes the need of evolving a long-term exposure assay and shows that the method followed in this study is suitable to evaluate the toxicants that exert delayed toxicity, using lower concentrations of toxicants as well as coloured samples.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".