Antimicrobial Activity of Amphiphilic Triazole-Linked Polymers Derived from Renewable Sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional engineered polymers are strong, stable, and can interact desirably within the human body in implants and medical devices. However, bacterial colonization of medical devices and implants constructed from these materials results in numerous hospital acquired infections (HAI) and deaths each year. Polytriazole based plastics containing triazole rings and fatty acid derivatives have been synthesized from biological sources without catalysts or solvents. In this study, three amphiphilic polytriazoles with varying triazole density and hydrophilic/hydrophobic segments demonstrated broad spectrum, contact antimicrobial properties against both Gram positive and negative bacteria. SEM analysis of bacteria killed by these polymers evidence membrane damage, indicating that these polymers act by direct contact with bacterial membranes. Surface hydrophobicity of these polymers increased with increasing triazole group density, which also improved the antimicrobial efficacy. This work demonstrates that amphiphilic polytriazoles have antimicrobial properties and that future utilization of triazole modified polymers may produce self-sterilizing materials which resist bacterial contamination and formation of antibiotic resistant organisms, ideal characteristics for medically relevant biomaterials.
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".