Adherence of Escherichia coli O157:H7 to epithelial cells in vitro and in pig gut loops is affected by bacterial culture conditions.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to determine the effect of bacterial culture conditions on adherence of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) O157:H7 strain 86-24 in vivo to pig enterocytes and to compare the results with adherence in vitro to cultured HEp-2 and IPEC-J2 cells. Growth of O157:H7 in MacConkey broth (MB) resulted in almost no adherence to both HEp-2 and IPEC-J2 cells; prior exposure of the bacteria to pH 2.5 reduced adherence. There was greater adherence by bacteria from static cultures than by those from shaken cultures and by bacteria cultured in brain-heart infusion (BHI) plus NaHCO₃ (BHIN) than by bacteria cultured in BHI. In contrast, in pig ileal loops, bacteria cultured in MB adhered well to enterocytes, and prior exposure to pH 2.5 had no effect on adherence. Among several media tested for their effect on bacterial adherence in the pig intestine, MB and BHIN proved to be the best. Bacterial adherence was dose-dependent and was more extensive in the ileum than in the colon. This study demonstrated that there are remarkable differences between culture conditions that promote adherence of an EHEC O157:H7 strain in vitro and in vivo, that culture conditions profoundly affect adherence to epithelial cells in vitro and in vivo, and that pig ileal loops are better suited to adherence studies than are colon loops.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".