<i>Rosmarinus officinalis</i>L. essential oil and the related compound 1,8-cineole do not induce direct or cross-protection in<i>Listeria monocytogenes</i>ATCC 7644 cultivated in meat broth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Listeria monocytogenes has the capability of adapting to 1 or more antimicrobial compounds or procedures applied by the food industry to control the growth and survival of microorganisms in foods. In this study, the effects of Rosmarinus officinalis essential oil (EO) and the related compound 1,8-cineole on the inhibition of the growth and survival of L. monocytogenes ATCC 7644 were determined. The ability of the R. officinalis EO and 1,8-cineole to induce direct and cross-protection of bacteria against various stresses (lactic acid, pH 5.2; NaCl, 3 g/100 mL; high temperature, 45 °C) was also determined. At all concentrations tested (minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), ½ MIC, and ¼ MIC), both compounds inhibited the cell viability of L. monocytogenes over 120 min of exposure. Overnight exposure of L. monocytogenes to sublethal amounts of either the R. officinalis EO or 1,8-cineole in meat broth revealed no induction of direct or cross-protection against lactic acid, NaCl, or high temperature. Similarly, cells subjected to 24 h cycles of adaptation with increasing amounts (½ MIC to 2× MIC) of the EO and 1,8-cineole showed no increase in direct tolerance, as they were able to survive in growth medium containing up to ½ MIC of either substance. These results show the antimicrobial efficacy of R. officinalis EO and 1,8-cineole for use in systems, particularly as anti-L. monocytogenes compounds.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".