Effects of Culture Media on the in vitro Susceptibility of Selected Opportunistic Fungi to Fluconazole and Itraconazole
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sensitivity of 23 isolates of opportunistic fungi, Aspergillus fumigatus (5), A. flavus (5), A. niger (5), Pseudallescheria boydii (5), Alternaria alternata (2) and Xylohypha bantiana (1), was investigated against fluconazole and itraconazole, using Sabouraud's dextrose broth (SD) and a high-resolution (HR) medium (Pfizer, Inc.). The procedure followed was a standard tube dilution (1 ml/tube) method. Candida albicans Y01 09 was included as reference strain to monitor quality and reproducibility. Results indicated that the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of fluconazole for all Aspergillus spp. and C. albicans were greater than or equal to 100 micrograms/ml in SD medium, whereas, for P. boydi, A. alternata and X. bantiana, the MICs were 50 micrograms/l. The MICs of itraconazole in SD medium were less than 0.195-1.56 micrograms/ml for the fungi tested. In HR medium, the MICs of fluconazole for the Aspergillus spp, were greater than or equal to 100 micrograms/ml, and those for P. boydii, A. alternata and X. bantiana were 0.78, 50 and 50 micrograms/ml, respectively. The MICs of itraconazole for all fungi ranged from less than 0.198 to 0.78 micrograms/ml in the HR medium. The values for the reference strain were 1.56 and 100 micrograms/ml in the HR medium for fluconazole and itraconazole, respectively. The HR medium was more suitable for testing P. boydii against fluconazole. This culture medium did not appear to significantly affect the MICs of itraconazole as compared to those of fluconazole, for the fungi investigated.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".