Bactericidal Effects of Natural Tenderizing Enzymes on Escherichia Coli and Listeria monocytogenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the antimicrobial activity of proteolytic, meat-tenderizing enzymes (papain and bromelain) against E. coli and L. monocytogenes at three different temperatures (5, 25 and 35°C). Two overnight cultures of E. coli JM109 and L. monocytogenes were separately suspended in 1% peptone water and exposed to a proteolytic enzyme (papain or bromelain) at three different temperatures. Bromelain concentrations (4 mg/ml) and (1 mg/ml) tested at 25°C against E. coli and L. monocytogenes, respectively, were the most effective concentrations tested reducing populations by 3.37 and 5.7 log CFU/ml after 48 h, respectively. Papain levels of (0.0625 mg/ml) and (0.5 mg/ml) were the most effective concentration tested at 25°C against E. coli and L. monocytogenes, respectively, reducing populations by 4.94 and 6.58log CFU/ml after 48h, respectively. Interestingly, the lower papain concentration tested (0.0625 mg/ml) was more effective than the higher concentration (0.5 mg/ml) against E. coli at all three temperatures. As expected, the temperature was directly related to enzyme efficacy against both E. coli and L. monocytogenes.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".