Evaluation of a rapid microbial detection method via phage lytic amplification assay coupled with Live/Dead fluorochromic stains
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To develop a method for rapid detection of bacteria via bacteriophage amplification coupled with exogenous fluorochromic stains. METHODS AND RESULTS: A method for the rapid detection of bacteria was developed which consisted of exposing the sample suspected to contain target cells to host-specific phage. After at least one infection cycle, bacteria known to be infected by the phage (helper cells) were added and the number of nascent phage particles was estimated using the Live/Dead BacLight Bacterial Viability kit. Using Pseudomonas aeruginosa, it was shown that the dead helper cell population following phage infection was proportional to the initial number of target cells present in the original sample. Approximately 1 x 10(1) CFU per ml of P. aeruginosa could be detected within 4 h without the need for enrichment. CONCLUSIONS: The phage lytic amplification assay coupled with exogenous fluorochromic stains was able to detect approx. 1 x 10(1) CFU per ml of the target bacterium within 4 h. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: A method to detect low number of bacterial cells in a sample within 4 h without the need for enrichment was developed.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it