MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099835504 · doi:10.3168/jds.2012-5734

The effect of milk fat globules on adherence and internalization of Salmonella Enteritidis to HT-29 cells

2012· article· en· W2099835504 on OpenAlexafffund
Anilda Guri, Mansel W. Griffiths, Cezar M. Khursigara, Milena Corredig

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphCanadian Institute for Public Safety Research and Treatment
FundersDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsGlobules of fatInternalizationSalmonella enteritidisFood scienceSalmonellaChemistryBovine milkMilk fatMicrobiologyBiologyBacteriaBiochemistryCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Milk fat globules were extracted from bovine and goat milk and incubated with HT-29 human adenocarcinoma cells to assess the attachment and internalization of Salmonella Enteritidis. Because the expression of bacterial adhesins is highly affected by the presence of antibiotic, the attachment was studied with and without antibiotic in the cell growth medium. Although no inhibitory effect of the fat globules was observed in the presence of the antibiotic, milk fat globules significantly inhibited the binding and internalization of Salmonella in medium free of antibiotic. The fat globules from both bovine and goat milk markedly reduced bacterial binding and invasion compared with controls, and the cells treated with goat milk-derived fat globules demonstrated greater protective properties than those derived from bovine milk. The effect of heat treatment on bovine fat globules was also investigated, and it was shown that the fat globules from heated milk had a higher degree of inhibition than those from unheated milk.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207