Increase of Glutathione by Listeria monocytogenesscott A Cmremr When It Is Challenged by Gallic Acid and Nisin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work investigates the activities of nisin and gallic acid, used either alone or in combination, against Listeria monocytogenes Scott A CmrEmr. The antimicrobial activity was determined using agar diffusion tests. The growth profile was evaluated by measurements of optical density and the numbers of viable cells. Lipid peroxidation was measured by the thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances (TBARS) technique, and the levels of reduced glutathione (GSH) were determined by the 5,5-dithio-bis-2-nitrobenzoic acid (DTNB) method. Growth of the pathogen was inhibited by the combined use of nisin and gallic acid, with an inhibition zone of approximately 11 mm at concentrations of 8 mg/ml and 100 IU/ml, respectively. No significant reduction in the number of viable pathogen cells was observed after 18 hours of exposure to nisin and gallic acid. There was a significant increase in the GSH concentration, and a decrease in lipid peroxidation, when the pathogen was exposed to increasing concentrations of nisin and gallic acid, used either alone or in combination, for a period of 18 hours. It was concluded that the Listeria monocytogenes cell line studied was able to resist the action of oxidizing agents by increasing the synthesis of GSH.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".