Comparison of virulence properties of <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i> exposed to water and grown in rich broth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an opportunistic pathogen that can infect susceptible patients suffering from cystic fibrosis, immunosuppression, and severe burns. Nosocomial- and community-acquired infection is likely due to contact with water sources contaminated with P. aeruginosa. Most of what is known about the virulence properties of P. aeruginosa was derived from studies using fairly rich broths, which do not represent conditions found in water, such as low nutrient concentrations. Here, we compare biofilm production, invasion of epithelial cells, cytotoxicity, and pyocyanin production of P. aeruginosa in water with P. aeruginosa grown in rich broth. Since tap water is variable, we used a defined water medium, Fraquil, to ensure reproducibility of the results. We found that P. aeruginosa does not readily form biofilm in Fraquil. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is equally able to attach to and invade epithelial cells but is more cytotoxic after incubation in water for 30 days than when it is grown in rich broth. Moreover, P. aeruginosa produces less pyocyanin when exposed to water. Our results show that P. aeruginosa seems to have different properties when exposed to water than when grown in rich broth.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".