Comparative susceptibility of planktonic and 3-day-old Salmonella Typhimurium biofilms to disinfectants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the susceptibility of a 3-day-old biofilm and planktonic Salmonella to disinfectants at different exposure times. We hypothesize that Salmonella biofilms are more resilient to disinfectants compared to planktonic Salmonella. METHODS AND RESULTS: The susceptibility of planktonic cells to disinfectants was tested by a modified version of the Council of Europe suspension test EN 1276. Salmonella biofilms were formed using the Calgary Biofilm Device. Results show that 3-day-old Salmonella biofilms are less susceptible to the disinfectants benzalkonium chloride, chlorhexidine gluconate, citric acid, quaternary ammonium compounds, sodium hypochlorite (SH) and ethanol, compared to planktonic Salmonella. Surprisingly, the results also demonstrate that low concentrations of SH were more effective against a 3-day-old biofilm compared to high concentrations of SH. CONCLUSIONS: While all the disinfectants evaluated were able to reduce biofilm-associated cells at concentrations and contact times sufficient to eliminate planktonic cells, there were still sufficient viable cells remaining in the biofilm to cause further contamination and potential infection. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Protocols for the use of chemical disinfectants need to include biofilm susceptibility testing. There is a requirement for an effective and standardized tool for determining the susceptibility of biofilms to disinfectants.
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".