In search of the microbe/mineral interface: quantitative analysis of bacteria on metal surfaces using vertical scanning interferometry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand the development of biofilms on metal surfaces, analysis of initial bacterial attachment to surfaces is crucial. Here we present the results of a study, using Shewanella oneidensis MR-1 as a model organism, in which vertical scanning interferometry (VSI) was used to investigate the initial stages of cell attachment to glass, steel and aluminium surfaces. It was found that while VSI gave unambiguous results with opaque surfaces, when reflective surfaces were used, an artifact sometimes appeared, with the bacteria appearing as rod-shaped pits rather than as cells on the surface. When the bacteria were altered to increase opacity, this artifact disappeared, and upon further investigation, it was found that the observational artifact was the result of a conflict between light reflected from the bacteria and the light reflected from the bacteria-metal interface. These results suggest that not only can bacteria be measured on surfaces using VSI, but with some modifications to the analytical software, there may be a unique window for studying the bacterial/substrate interface that can be used for quantitative observations. Imaging and characterization of the bacteria-substrate interface in vivo (previously invisible) will provide new insights into the interactions that occur at this important juncture.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it