The effects of orthodontic bonding steps on biofilm formation of<i>Streptococcus mutans</i>in the presence of saliva
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of various orthodontic bonding steps on biofilm formation of Streptococcus mutans in the presence of saliva. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Hydroxyapatite (HA) and orthodontic adhesive (AD) disks were prepared to a uniform size. HA disks were etched with 37% phosphoric acid gel in the etched group (HE). In the primed group (HP), Transbond XT primer was applied to the etched HA surface and light-cured. For biofilm formation, Streptococcus mutans was grown on each specimen in a biofilm medium with either glucose or sucrose in the presence of fluid-phase UWS (F-UWS) or surface adsorbed saliva (S-UWS). The adherent bacteria were quantified by enumeration of the total viable counts of bacteria. Biofilms formed on each surface were examined by scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: When glucose was used, both F-UWS and S-UWS suppressed biofilm formation of S. mutans. Compared to HA and HE, biofilm formation was significantly inhibited on HP and AD in the presence of glucose. Biofilm-forming patterns that were inhibited by saliva were restored in a sucrose-containing medium. F-UWS promoted biofilm formation on HA and HE, while S-UWS significantly promoted biofilm formation on HP. S. mutans developed biofilm better on HA and HE than on AD when sucrose was used as the sole carbohydrate source. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the biofilm development by S. mutans is significantly influenced by the orthodontic bonding procedure. Biofilm formation of S. mutans was inhibited on AD more than other surfaces, irrespective of the presence of saliva or a carbohydrate source.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".